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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 5 Oct 2021 12:12:30 +0200
From:   Marijn Suijten <>
To:     Daniel Thompson <>
Cc:, Andy Gross <>,
        Bjorn Andersson <>,
        Lee Jones <>,
        Jingoo Han <>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        Konrad Dybcio <>,
        Martin Botka <>,
        Jami Kettunen <>,
        Pavel Dubrova <>,
        Kiran Gunda <>,
        Courtney Cavin <>,
        Bryan Wu <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] backlight: qcom-wled: Consistently use
 enabled-strings in set_brightness

On 2021-10-05 10:33:31, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 09:27:40PM +0200, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> > The hardware is capable of controlling any non-contiguous sequence of
> > LEDs specified in the DT using qcom,enabled-strings as u32
> > array, and this also follows from the DT-bindings documentation.  The
> > numbers specified in this array represent indices of the LED strings
> > that are to be enabled and disabled.
> > 
> > Its value is appropriately used to setup and enable string modules, but
> > completely disregarded in the set_brightness paths which only iterate
> > over the number of strings linearly.
> > Take an example where only string 2 is enabled with
> > qcom,enabled_strings=<2>: this string is appropriately enabled but
> > subsequent brightness changes would have only touched the zero'th
> > brightness register because num_strings is 1 here.  This is simply
> > addressed by looking up the string for this index in the enabled_strings
> > array just like the other codepaths that iterate over num_strings.
> This isn't true until patch 10 is applied!

Patch 9 and 10 were split up at a last resort to prevent a clash in the
title, apologies for that.

> Given both patches fix the same issue in different functions I'd prefer
> these to be squashed together (and doubly so because the autodetect code
> uses set_brightness() as a helper function).

That's a fair reason, and solution I agree on.  I'll figure out how to
generify the title and re-spin this patchset except if there are other
reviewers/maintainers I should wait for.

- Marijn

> Daniel.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists