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]
Message-ID: <ba5e3217-afa0-95ae-406a-034d88d979b0@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:56:03 -0700
From:   Hemant Kumar <hemantk@...eaurora.org>
To:     Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>,
        manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org
Cc:     bbhatt@...eaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] bus: mhi: core: Offload register accesses to the
 controller



On 4/27/20 8:59 AM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> When reading or writing MHI registers, the core assumes that the physical
> link is a memory mapped PCI link.  This assumption may not hold for all
> MHI devices.  The controller knows what is the physical link (ie PCI, I2C,
> SPI, etc), and therefore knows the proper methods to access that link.
> The controller can also handle link specific error scenarios, such as
> reading -1 when the PCI link went down.
> 
> Therefore, it is appropriate that the MHI core requests the controller to
> make register accesses on behalf of the core, which abstracts the core
> from link specifics, and end up removing an unnecessary assumption.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Hemant Kumar <hemantk@...eaurora.org>

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ