linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] platform/chrome: cros_ec_lpcs: reserve the MEC LPC I/O ports first

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YfLxw9r6VvbxijRM@chromium.org>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jan 2022 19:25:55 +0000
From:   Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org>
To:     Dustin Howett <dustin@...ett.net>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...gle.com>,
        Michael Niksa <michael.niksa@...e.com>, aaboagye@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] platform/chrome: cros_ec_lpcs: reserve the MEC
 LPC I/O ports first

+Aseda,

On Jan 27 13:18, Dustin Howett wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:55 PM Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dustin,
> >
> > I can't find this update in the EC code base [1]. Is there any reason
> > you are not adding this, or is the change in flight (or in some other
> > location)?
> >
> > [1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/ec/+/refs/heads/main/include/ec_commands.h
> >
> 
> Hey Prashant,
> 
> The host communication adapters in the EC repo don't support the MEC
> protocol at all,
> so it did not seem necessary to bring these changes over. I'd be happy
What source do Framework laptop ECs (MECs?) compile their EC firmware
from?

> to do so, of
> course, if that is desirable.
> 
> My understanding (well, my guess) is that protocol support was never
> added because
> it is already implemented here in cros_ec_lpcs. Userland I/O port
> access is(?) less desirable
> than having this driver handle it.
Yeah, I wasn't thinking about userland i/o port access, but just having
this behaviour/different I/O port mapping described in the EC code base
too.