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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 11:18:12 +0100 From: Richard Hughes <hughsient@...il.com> To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Daniel Gutson <daniel.gutson@...ypsium.com>, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alex Bazhaniuk <alex@...ypsium.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Module argument to control whether intel-spi-pci attempts to turn the SPI flash chip writeable On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 10:57, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote: > I think instead of this we should simply make it so that the driver > never tries to make the chip writable. I think this is a good idea, but I wasn't sure if it was an acceptable behaviour change. Should the driver still try to set BCR_WPD when writing an image (i.e. defer the setting of write enable until later), or just not set the BCR register at all? I think your last comment was the latter, but wanted to check. Richard.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists