linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] i2c: npcm: Bug fixes timeout, spurious interrupts

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: <5d507fda-525e-4064-3add-0bb0cc23d016@canonical.com>
Date:   Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:30:31 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To:     Tyrone Ting <warp5tw@...il.com>, avifishman70@...il.com,
        tmaimon77@...il.com, tali.perry1@...il.com, venture@...gle.com,
        yuenn@...gle.com, benjaminfair@...gle.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        semen.protsenko@...aro.org, yangyicong@...ilicon.com,
        wsa@...nel.org, jie.deng@...el.com, sven@...npeter.dev,
        bence98@....bme.hu, christophe.leroy@...roup.eu,
        lukas.bulwahn@...il.com, olof@...om.net, arnd@...db.de,
        digetx@...il.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
        tali.perry@...oton.com, Avi.Fishman@...oton.com,
        tomer.maimon@...oton.com, KWLIU@...oton.com, JJLIU0@...oton.com,
        kfting@...oton.com
Cc:     openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] i2c: npcm: Bug fixes timeout, spurious
 interrupts

On 20/02/2022 04:53, Tyrone Ting wrote:
> From: Tyrone Ting <kfting@...oton.com>
> 
> This patchset includes the following fixes:
> 
> - Add dt-bindings description for NPCM845.
> - Bug fix for timeout calculation.
> - Better handling of spurious interrupts.
> - Fix for event type in slave mode.
> - Removal of own slave addresses [2:10].
> - Support for next gen BMC (NPCM845).
> 
> The NPCM I2C driver is tested on NPCM750 and NPCM845 evaluation boards.
> 
> Addressed comments from:
>  - Jonathan Neuschäfer : https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/2/7/670
>  - Krzysztof Kozlowski : https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/2/7/760

How did you address the ABI change comment? I still see you break the
ABI with the introduction of a new, required property.


Best regards,
Krzysztof