linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] P2040/P2041 i2c recovery erratum

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: <87zgwigvd6.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
Date:   Wed, 26 May 2021 11:02:45 +1000
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
        Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc:     andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] P2040/P2041 i2c recovery erratum

Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org> writes:
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:20:48AM +1200, Chris Packham wrote:
>> The P2040/P2041 has an erratum where the i2c recovery scheme
>> documented in the reference manual (and currently implemented
>> in the i2c-mpc.c driver) does not work. The errata document
>> provides an alternative that does work. This series implements
>> that alternative and uses a property in the devicetree to
>> decide when the alternative mechanism is needed.
>
> The series looks good to me. Usually, I don't take DTS patches. This
> time I'd make an exception and apply all patches to for-current because
> this is clearly a bugfix. For that, I'd need an ack from PPC
> maintainers. Could I have those for patches 2+3?

Yep, done.

cheers