linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] ARM: imx_v6_v7_defconfig: build imx sdma driver as module

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: <b399f461991b3dc6ba3d3332a054e7feea1d37f1.camel@toradex.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 15:55:54 +0000
From:   Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com>
To:     "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "marex@...x.de" <marex@...x.de>
CC:     "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "andreas@...nade.info" <andreas@...nade.info>,
        "festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
        "kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        "s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        "linux-imx@....com" <linux-imx@....com>,
        "shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        "pzimmermann@...electronics.com" <pzimmermann@...electronics.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/9] ARM: imx_v6_v7_defconfig: build imx sdma driver as
 module

On Mon, 2021-09-20 at 16:52 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 9/20/21 4:49 PM, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> > From: Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com>
> > 
> > Build CONFIG_IMX_SDMA as a module to avoid the following boot issue:
> > 
> > [    5.214751] imx-sdma 20ec000.sdma: Direct firmware load for
> >   imx/sdma/sdma-imx6q.bin failed with error -2
> > [    5.215762] imx-sdma 20ec000.sdma: Falling back to sysfs fallback
> >   for: imx/sdma/sdma-imx6q.bin
> 
> Isn't there some ROM-side SDMA firmware baked into the MX6 which is used 
> as a fallback if loading newer one from filesystem fails ? I suspect the 
> default ROM firmware might be buggy.

I'm not so sure about this. At least it seems to fail if no external firmware can be loaded.