linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix issues with command queuing in arasan controllers

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, 8 Jan 2020 13:59:10 +0200
From:   Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To:     Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     ulf.hansson@...aro.org, shawn.lin@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix issues with command queuing in arasan controllers

On 8/01/20 1:49 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:
> Adrian,
> 
> On 08/01/20 5:12 pm, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>> On 8/01/20 1:30 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 30/12/19 2:53 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:
>>>> In some Arasan SDHCI controllers, after tuning, the tuning pattern data
>>>> is leftover in the sdhci buffer. This leads to issues with future data
>>>> commands, especially when command queuing is enabled. The following
>>>> patches help fix this issue by resetting data lines after tuning is
>>>> finished. The first two patches have been tested with TI's am65x and
>>>> j721e SoCs using the sdhci_am654 driver.
>>>>
>>>> I have a strong suspicion that this is the same issue with
>>>> the sdhci-of-arasan driver where they are forced to dump data from the
>>>> buffer before enabling command queuing. I need help from someone with a
>>>> compatible platform to test this.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I had some discussions with our hardware team and they say we should be
>>> asserting both SRC and SRD reset after tuning to start from a clean
>>> state. Will update the patches to do that in v2.
>>
>> Can you use the ->execute_tuning() for that instead of a quirk?
>>
> 
> ->platform_execute_tuning() is called before __sdhci_execute_tuning(). I
> need this to be done after that. Should I add a post_tuning() callback?

I meant hook host->mmc_host_ops.execute_tuning and call
sdhci_execute_tuning() and then sdhci_reset(), like in intel_execute_tuning().