linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] SPI broken for SPI based panel drivers

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: <077C7A16-61D6-41E5-81F3-792B6B5CEC5E@goldelico.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Dec 2020 22:31:40 +0100
From:   "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
To:     Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        Discussions about the Letux Kernel 
        <letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>,
        Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
Subject: Re: [BUG] SPI broken for SPI based panel drivers


> Am 04.12.2020 um 20:19 schrieb Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>:
> 
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 11:52 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> Anyways it is debatable if this is a bug at all. It is just a definition.
>>> 
>>> I respectfully disagree. Prior to the fix, your panel's active-low chip select
>>> needed to be described in the devicetree with 'spi-cs-high'. That sounds
>>> very much like a bug to me.
>> 
>> It could have been described by ACTIVE_LOW without spi-cs-high but that did
>> emit a nasty and not helpful warning on each boot.
> 
> That will not work, try it out. You will see that without the bugfix, your chip
> select is consistently inverted, no matter how you formulate it in the
> devicetree.

I have.

But please show me which line in my analyses table of my mail 12 hours ago
is wrong. Then I can repeat the test and we can discuss the reasons.

> 
>> 
>> I'd prefer if you or maybe Linus could submit such a patch and I am happy to review it.
> 
> I cannot help you with that, I'm sorry.


Come on...

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus