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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 21 Aug 2019 14:39:02 +0100
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Schrempf Frieder <frieder.schrempf@...tron.de>,
        "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
        "mchehab+samsung@...nel.org" <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
        "linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "marek.vasut@...il.com" <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        "tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com" <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
        "miquel.raynal@...tlin.com" <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        "richard@....at" <richard@....at>,
        wanghuiqiang <wanghuiqiang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: mtd: Update spi nor reference driver

On 20/08/2019 17:58, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 03:09:15PM +0100, John Garry wrote:
>> On 19/08/2019 05:39, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>>> On 16/08/19 3:50 PM, John Garry wrote:
>
>>>> About the child spi flash devices, is the recommendation to just use
>>>> PRP0001 HID and "jedec,spi-nor" compatible?
>
>>> I am not quite familiar with ACPI systems, but child flash device should
>>> use "jedec,spi-nor" as compatible.
>
>> Right, so to use SPI MEM framework, it looks like I will have to use PRP0001
>> and "jedec,spi-nor" as compatible.
>
>> My reluctance in using PRP0001 and compatible "jedec,spi-nor" is how other
>> OS can understand this.
>

Hi Mark,

> Last I heard Windows wasn't doing anything with PRP0001 but on the other
> hand the idiomatic way to handle this for ACPI is as far as I can tell
> to have what is essentially a board file loaded based on DMI information
> without any real enumerability so there's no real conflict between the
> two methods.

Fine, I'll consider this alt method further.

Thanks,
John

>



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ