linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] spi: Add HiSilicon v3xx SPI NOR flash controller driver

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:   Fri, 10 Jan 2020 16:09:39 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <chenxiang66@...ilicon.com>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <xuejiancheng@...ilicon.com>,
        <fengsheng5@...wei.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        wanghuiqiang <wanghuiqiang@...wei.com>, <liusimin4@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] spi: Add HiSilicon v3xx SPI NOR flash controller
 driver

On 10/01/2020 15:12, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 02:58:54PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
>> On 10/01/2020 14:07, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:55:37AM +0000, John Garry wrote: >
> 

Hi Mark,

>>> OK, so that's just reusing the DT binding in which case everything
>>> that's valid for the DT binding should also be valid for ACPI - I
>>> thought that actually worked automatically without you having to do
>>> anything in the code but ICBW.
> 
>> I thought that it would be improper as we could be mixing ACPI methods to
>> describe the serial bus (SPI Serial Bus Connection Resource Descriptor) and
>> also DT properties which could conflict, like CS active high.
> 
> Yes, that's one of the issues with importing bits of DT into ACPI
> unfortunately - you will get conflicts, it's not clear it's a good idea
> to be using PRP0001 for SPI stuff given that there's bus level bindings
> for both ACPI and SPI and they don't line up exactly.

Yeah, I'm not entirely comfortable with this yet.

> 
>> However I do see extra properties than "compatible" being added in DSD for
>> PRP0001:
>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/662813/ (see EEPROM part)
> 
>> And if we were to do this, I think that we would need to add some
>> device_property_read_u32("spi-rx-bus-width", ...), etc calls in the SPI FW
>> parsing for ACPI path - I couldn't see that.
> 
> You'd need parsing code, yes.
> 

I'll continue to check the options.

Thanks,
john