linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 14/33] crypto: rockchip: handle reset also in PM

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]

Date:   Tue, 21 Jun 2022 10:05:54 +0200
From:   LABBE Corentin <clabbe@...libre.com>
To:     John Keeping <john@...anate.com>
Cc:     heiko@...ech.de, ardb@...nel.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 14/33] crypto: rockchip: handle reset also in PM

Le Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:04:24PM +0100, John Keeping a écrit :
> On Sun, May 08, 2022 at 06:59:38PM +0000, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> > reset could be handled by PM functions.
> 
> Is there any further rationale for this?
> 
> After this change there is no longer a guaranteed reset pulse on probe
> since the reset control may already be de-asserted.  This is normally
> the most important case for a reset as it's the only time when the state
> of the hardware is unknown.
> 
> The original use of devm_add_action_or_reset() seems a bit weird already
> since there doesn't seem to be any need to assert reset when the driver
> is unloaded.
> 

I am not an hw engineer, so my knowledge on reset is low.
So why not having a reset pulse on probe is a problem ?

Do you mean I must put reset asserted on probe ?