linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 1/2] ata: ahci_brcm: Fix use of BCM7216 reset controller

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: <1b66cceb-577f-658f-9a97-ec987c87367a@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:59:56 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@...il.com>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, james.quinlan@...adcom.com
Cc:     Jim Quinlan <jquinlan@...adcom.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "open list:LIBATA SUBSYSTEM (Serial and Parallel ATA drivers)" 
        <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 1/2] ata: ahci_brcm: Fix use of BCM7216 reset
 controller

On 12/16/20 1:41 PM, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> From: Jim Quinlan <jquinlan@...adcom.com>
> 
> This driver may use one of two resets controllers.  Keep them in separate
> variables to keep things simple.  The reset controller "rescal" is shared
> between the AHCI driver and the PCIe driver for the BrcmSTB 7216 chip.  Use
> devm_reset_control_get_optional_shared() to handle this sharing.
> 
> Fixes: 272ecd60a636 ("ata: ahci_brcm: BCM7216 reset is self de-asserting")
> Fixes: c345ec6a50e9 ("ata: ahci_brcm: Support BCM7216 reset controller name")
> Signed-off-by: Jim Quinlan <jquinlan@...adcom.com>

Thanks a lot for fixing this Jim, given the reset lines are still
mutually exclusive the single variable along with the 7216 versus
another chip differentiation would still work, but I have no objection
to the approach you have taken:

Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
-- 
Florian