linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: dts: sm8350: fix tlmm base address

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: <Ya9JhqZ/Hyj9HdRk@matsya>
Date:   Tue, 7 Dec 2021 17:16:14 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Katherine Perez <kaperez@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: dts: sm8350: fix tlmm base address

On 30-11-21, 21:15, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 22 Nov 22:03 CST 2021, Vinod Koul wrote:
> 
> > On 22-11-21, 11:05, Katherine Perez wrote:
> > > TLMM controller base address is incorrect and will hang on some platforms.
> > > Fix by giving the correct address.
> > 
> > Thanks, recheck the spec this looks correct. We should have tlmm reg
> > space here and not tlmm base which also contains xpu region (thus hang)
> > 
> 
> Aren't you reading the patch backwards?

I guess :(

> Afaict downstream the driver carries an offset of 0x100000, which we
> dropped as we upstreamed the driver. As such changing reg to 0x0f000000
> should cause most gpio register accesses to fall outside the actual
> register window.
> 
> Or perhaps I'm missing something here?

I relooked and XPU is at 0xF000000 and Reg at 0xF100000
So this patch should be dropped as such. The size mentioned in
documentation is also correct

Katherine, can you elaborate more on the hang you have observed? Any
specific pins you use which causes this?


-- 
~Vinod