linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] i2c: designware: Discard Cherry Trail model flag

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: <20200527154854.GH1634618@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 May 2020 18:48:54 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>
Cc:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
        Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] i2c: designware: Discard Cherry Trail model flag

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 05:29:02PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 04:43:39PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 03:01:07PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > A PM workaround activated by the flag MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL has been removed
> > > since commit 9cbeeca05049 ("i2c: designware: Remove Cherry Trail PMIC I2C
> > > bus pm_disabled workaround"), but the flag most likely by mistake has been
> > > left in the Dw I2C drivers. Let's remove it.
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > -#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT	0x00000200
> > > +#define MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT	0x00000100
> > 
> > But why?
> > 
> > Does 0x200 work or not? I didn't see this in commit message.
> 
> I removed the MODEL_CHERRYTRAIL flag and redefined the only left
> MODEL_MSCC_OCELOT flag to set the very first bit allocated for the model
> flags. Isn't that obvious?

Yes, but how it's related to the MSCC_OCELOT?

Can't you simple put your define later to that number if absence of 0x100
provokes an exception when reading this code.

Again, unneeded churn.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko