linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] clk: sifive: Fix the wrong bit field shift

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: <mhng-738e4a27-9751-4937-b3ed-efdcdce56f0c@palmerdabbelt-glaptop1>
Date:   Fri, 20 Nov 2020 17:29:28 -0800 (PST)
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To:     zong.li@...ive.com
CC:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, sboyd@...nel.org,
        schwab@...ux-m68k.org, pragnesh.patel@...nfive.com,
        aou@...s.berkeley.edu, mturquette@...libre.com,
        yash.shah@...ive.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        zong.li@...ive.com, pragnesh.patel@...ive.com
Subject:     Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] clk: sifive: Fix the wrong bit field shift

On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 02:06:08 PST (-0800), zong.li@...ive.com wrote:
> The clk enable bit should be 31 instead of 24.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zong Li <zong.li@...ive.com>
> Reported-by: Pragnesh Patel <pragnesh.patel@...ive.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/sifive/sifive-prci.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/sifive/sifive-prci.h b/drivers/clk/sifive/sifive-prci.h
> index 802fc8fb9c09..da7be9103d4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/sifive/sifive-prci.h
> +++ b/drivers/clk/sifive/sifive-prci.h
> @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@
>
>  /* DDRPLLCFG1 */
>  #define PRCI_DDRPLLCFG1_OFFSET		0x10
> -#define PRCI_DDRPLLCFG1_CKE_SHIFT	24
> +#define PRCI_DDRPLLCFG1_CKE_SHIFT	31
>  #define PRCI_DDRPLLCFG1_CKE_MASK	(0x1 << PRCI_DDRPLLCFG1_CKE_SHIFT)
>
>  /* GEMGXLPLLCFG0 */
> @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@
>
>  /* GEMGXLPLLCFG1 */
>  #define PRCI_GEMGXLPLLCFG1_OFFSET	0x20
> -#define RCI_GEMGXLPLLCFG1_CKE_SHIFT	24
> +#define RCI_GEMGXLPLLCFG1_CKE_SHIFT	31
>  #define PRCI_GEMGXLPLLCFG1_CKE_MASK	(0x1 << PRCI_GEMGXLPLLCFG1_CKE_SHIFT)
>
>  /* CORECLKSEL */

Section 7.3 of v1.0 of the FU540 manual says that bit 24 contains the PLL clock
enable for both of these.  I don't know if that's accurate, but if it is then I
believe this would break the FU540.  Don't have one to test on, though.