linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH] Revert "ASoC: fsl_esai: ETDR and TX0~5 registers are non volatile"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190607220517.GA3824@Asurada-Nvidia.nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Jun 2019 15:05:18 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     shengjiu.wang@....com, timur@...nel.org, Xiubo.Lee@...il.com,
        festevam@...il.com, lgirdwood@...il.com, perex@...ex.cz,
        tiwai@...e.com, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH] Revert "ASoC: fsl_esai: ETDR and TX0~5 registers
 are non volatile"

Hello Mark,

On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 12:12:44PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 04:01:05PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > This reverts commit 8973112aa41b8ad956a5b47f2fe17bc2a5cf2645.
> 
> Please use subject lines matching the style for the subsystem.  This
> makes it easier for people to identify relevant patches.
> 
> > 1) Though ETDR and TX0~5 are not volatile but write-only registers,
> >    they should not be cached either. According to the definition of
> >    "volatile_reg", one should be put in the volatile list if it can
> >    not be cached.
> 
> There's no problem with caching write only registers, having a cache
> allows one to do read/modify/write cycles on them and can help with
> debugging.  The original reason we had cache code in ASoC was for write
> only devices.

Maybe because my paragraph doesn't state it clearly -- it's nothing
wrong with regmap caching write-only registers; but it caching data
registers would potentially cause dirty data or channel swap/shift.
So the reason (1) here is "cannot cached" == "should be volatile".

I will revise the commit message for review and fix the subject.

Thank you
Nicolin