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]
Date:   Sun, 20 Feb 2022 21:22:35 +0900
From:   Tokunori Ikegami <>
To:     Ahmad Fatoum <>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <>,,,,,,
        "" <>
Cc:     Chris Packham <>,
        Brian Norris <>,
        David Woodhouse <>,,,
        "" <>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <>,
Subject: Re: [BUG] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: write regression since v4.17-rc1

Hi Ahmad-san,

Could you please try the version 2 patch attached for the error case?
This version is to check the DQ true data 0xFF by chip_good().
But I am not sure if this works or not since the error is possible to be 
caused by Hi-Z 0xff on floating bus or etc.

On 2022/02/15 3:46, Tokunori Ikegami wrote:
> Hi Ahmad-san,
> On 2022/02/15 1:22, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>> Hello Tokunori-san,
>> On 13.02.22 17:47, Tokunori Ikegami wrote:
>>> Hi Ahmad-san,
>>> Thanks for your confirmations. Sorry for late to reply.
>> No worries. I appreciate you taking the time.
>>> Could you please try the patch attached to disable the chip_good() 
>>> change as before?
>>> I think this should work for S29GL964N since the chip_ready() is 
>>> used and works as mentioned.
>> yes, this resolves my issue:
>> Tested-by: Ahmad Fatoum <>
> Thanks for your testing. I have just sent the patch to review.
>>>>>> Doesn't seem to be a buffered write issue here though as the writes
>>>>>> did work fine before dfeae1073583. Any other ideas?
>>>>> At first I thought the issue is possible to be resolved by using 
>>>>> the word write instead of the buffered writes.
>>>>> Now I am thinking to disable the changes dfeae1073583 partially 
>>>>> with any condition if possible.
>>>> What seems to work for me is checking if chip_good or chip_ready
>>>> and map_word is equal to 0xFF. I can't justify why this is ok though.
>>>> (Worst case bus is floating at this point of time and Hi-Z is read
>>>> as 0xff on CPU data lines...)
>>> Sorry I am not sure about this.
>>> I thought the chip_ready() itself is correct as implemented as the 
>>> data sheet in the past.
>>> But it did not work correctly so changed to use chip_good() instead 
>>> as it is also correct.
>> What exactly in the datasheet makes you believe chip_good is not 
>> appropriate?
> I just mentioned about the actual issue behaviors as not worked 
> chip_good() on S29GL964N and not worked chip_ready() on 
> MX29GL512FHT2I-11G before etc.
> Anyway let me recheck the data sheet details as just checked it again 
> quickly but needed more investigation to understand.

As far as I checked still both chip_good() and chip_ready() seem correct 
but still the root cause is unknown.
If as you mentioned the issue was cased by the DQ true data 0xFF I am 
not sure why the read work without any error after the write operation.
Also if the error was caused by the Hi-Z 0xff on floating bus as 
mentioned I am not sure why the read work without any error after the 
write operation with chip_ready().
Sorry anyway the root cause is also unknown when the write operation was 
changed to use chip_good() instead of chip_ready().


> Regards,
> Ikegami
>> Cheers,
>> Ahmad
View attachment "v2-0001-mtd-cfi_cmdset_0002-Change-chip_good-to-check-DQ-.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (4289 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists