linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] mtd: rawnand: Add NAND controller support on Intel LGM SoC

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, 29 Apr 2020 16:22:49 +0200
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To:     "Ramuthevar, Vadivel MuruganX" 
        <vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, cheol.yong.kim@...el.com,
        hauke.mehrtens@...el.com, qi-ming.wu@...el.com,
        anders.roxell@...aro.org, vigneshr@...com, arnd@...db.de,
        richard@....at, brendanhiggins@...gle.com,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        masonccyang@...c.com.tw, andriy.shevchenko@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] mtd: rawnand: Add NAND controller support on
 Intel LGM SoC

On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:42:05 +0800
"Ramuthevar, Vadivel MuruganX"
<vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

> +
> +#define EBU_ADDR_SEL(n)		(0x20 + (n) * 4)
> +#define EBU_ADDR_MASK		(5 << 4)

It's still unclear what ADDR_MASK is for. Can you add a comment
explaining what it does?

> +#define EBU_ADDR_SEL_REGEN	0x1


> +
> +	writel(lower_32_bits(ebu_host->cs[ebu_host->cs_num].nand_pa) |
> +	       EBU_ADDR_SEL_REGEN | EBU_ADDR_MASK,
> +	       ebu_host->ebu + EBU_ADDR_SEL(reg));
> +
> +	writel(EBU_MEM_BASE_CS_0 | EBU_ADDR_MASK | EBU_ADDR_SEL_REGEN,
> +	       ebu_host->ebu + EBU_ADDR_SEL(0));
> +	writel(EBU_MEM_BASE_CS_1 | EBU_ADDR_MASK | EBU_ADDR_SEL_REGEN,
> +	       ebu_host->ebu + EBU_ADDR_SEL(reg));

That's super weird. You seem to set EBU_ADDR_SEL(reg) twice. Are you
sure that's needed, and are we setting EBU_ADDR_SEL(0) here?