linux-kernel - Re: [RFC-PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: add conditional 4B opcodes

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: <20200508192827.GH9016@zorba>
Date:   Fri, 8 May 2020 19:28:27 +0000
From:   "Daniel Walker (danielwa)" <danielwa@...co.com>
To:     Pratyush Yadav <me@...avpratyush.com>
CC:     Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        "xe-linux-external(mailer list)" <xe-linux-external@...co.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "Miquel Raynal" <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC-PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: add conditional 4B opcodes

On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 12:37:35AM +0530, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> On 07/05/20 06:13PM, Daniel Walker (danielwa) wrote:
> > On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 11:33:46PM +0530, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> > > On 07/05/20 09:20AM, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > Some chips have 4B opcodes, but there is no way to know if they have
> > > > them. This device tree option allows platform owners to force enable 4b
> > > > opcodes when they know their chips support it even when it can be
> > > > automatically identified.
> > > 
> > > Do you mean that two chips might have the same ID but one of them can 
> > > support 4B opcodes and the other can not? Is it possible to detect this 
> > > in a fixup hook? I think it would be better to do something like this in 
> > > a fixup hook instead of via device tree.
> >   
> > Yes. The chip I added the option for is an example of this, it's n25q256a. I'm not familiar with the
> > fixup hook mechanism, but I would assume you need some way to tell between the 4B
> > opcode chips and the non-4B opcode chips. For n25q256a, we have not found a way
> > to do that.
> 
> I'm assuming this patch is related to [0]. If all you want is to address 
> memory above 16M, why not switch to 4-byte addressing mode instead? 
> Taking a quick look at the datasheet tells me this can be done via the 
> "Enter 4-byte address mode" command (0xB7). Then just use the regular 
> read/program commands with 4-byte addresses. Does that work for you? Is 
> there any reason you _have_ to use dedicated 4B opcodes?

It might, I don't think we need anything beyond access to move than 16M. Your
proposal would be to have a hook which enters the 0xB7 command?

I guess the question would be do all the chips have this ability.

Daniel