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  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]
Date:   Fri, 14 Feb 2020 11:41:24 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <>
To:     Light Hsieh <>
Cc:     "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <>,
        "" <>,
        Sean Wang <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/6] pinctrl: mediatek: Check gpio pin number and use
 binary search in mtk_hw_pin_field_lookup()

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 7:53 AM <> wrote:

> From: Light Hsieh <>
> 1. Check if gpio pin number is in valid range to prevent from get invalid
>    pointer 'desc' in the following code:
>         desc = (const struct mtk_pin_desc *)&hw->soc->pins[gpio];
> 2. Improve  mtk_hw_pin_field_lookup()
> 2.1 Modify mtk_hw_pin_field_lookup() to use binary search for accelerating
>      search.
> 2.2 Correct message after the following check fail:
>     if (hw->soc->reg_cal && hw->soc->reg_cal[field].range) {
>                 rc = &hw->soc->reg_cal[field];
>     The original message is:
>         "Not support field %d for pin %d (%s)\n"
>     However, the check is on soc chip level, not on pin level yet.
>     So the message is corrected as:
>         "Not support field %d for this soc\n"
> Signed-off-by: Light Hsieh <>

I managed to apply all 6 patches now for v5.7.

I had a big problem extracting the patches since they get base64
encoded and for some reason git am cannot deal with this. I thought
it would but it doesn't possibly because of custom headers in the

I have to save out the base64 part of the message, decode separately,
then paste back the result removing the transfer-encoding line
of the original message.

cat mtk65.txt | base64 -d -i > scratch.patch

Any tips on how to handle this more efficiently?

Linus Walleij

Powered by blists - more mailing lists