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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 10:24:00 -0800 From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: motorola-cpcap: Do not hardcode SPI mode flags * Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> [200107 09:58]: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 6:04 PM Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote: > > > * Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> [700101 00:00]: > > > The current use of mode flags to us SPI_MODE_0 and > > > SPI_CS_HIGH is fragile: it overwrites anything already > > > assigned by the SPI core. Change it thusly: > > > > > > - Just |= the SPI_MODE_0 so we keep other flags > > > - Assign ^= SPI_CS_HIGH since we might be active high > > > already, and that is usually the case with GPIOs used > > > for chip select, even if they are in practice active low. > > > > > > Add a comment clarifying why ^= SPI_CS_HIGH is the right > > > choice here. > > > > Looks like this breaks booting for droid4 with a cpcap > > PMIC, probably as regulators won't work. There's no GPIO > > controller involved in this case for the chip select, the > > pins are directly controlled by the spi-omap2-mcspi.c > > driver. > > > > From the pin muxing setup we see there's a pull-down on > > mcspi1_cs0 pin meaning it's active high: > > > > /* 0x4a100138 mcspi1_cs0.mcspi1_cs0 ae23 */ > > OMAP4_IOPAD(0x138, PIN_INPUT_PULLDOWN | MUX_MODE0) > > > > My guess a similar issue is with similar patches for > > all non-gpio spi controllers? > > > > Let me know if you want me to test some other changes, > > or if this patch depends on some other changes. > > So this must mean that something else is setting SPI_CS_HIGH > for this driver, such as the device tree, right? Hmm yes we have "spi-cs-high" property set in the dts. But looking at drivers/spi/spi-omap2-mcspi.c, it also provides an option to use a GPIO for chip select in omap2_mcspi_setup(). That does not seem to be used though based on a quick grep though. > And the |= SPI_CS_HIGH assignment in the driver is just > surplus and we should just delete this code instead. > > Would that be right? Sorry I don't know, maybe. If you have some test patch to try I can easily test. Regards, Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists