linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mtd: spi-nor: add SFDP fixups for Quad Page Program

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: <d380a6e8-6666-1c0c-109a-3f8449fb7f02@microchip.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:48:51 +0000
From:   <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
To:     <sudip.mukherjee@...ive.com>
CC:     <pratyush@...nel.org>, <michael@...le.cc>,
        <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, <richard@....at>, <vigneshr@...com>,
        <greentime.hu@...ive.com>, <jude.onyenegecha@...ive.com>,
        <william.salmon@...ive.com>, <adnan.chowdhury@...ive.com>,
        <ben.dooks@...ive.com>, <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mtd: spi-nor: add SFDP fixups for Quad Page
 Program

On 8/10/22 18:14, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 9:06 AM <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 8/9/22 23:14, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> SFDP table of some flash chips do not advertise support of Quad Input
>>> Page Program even though it has support. Use fixup flags and add hardware
>>> cap for these chips.
>>>
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>> @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct flash_info {
>>>         u8 fixup_flags;
>>>  #define SPI_NOR_4B_OPCODES             BIT(0)
>>>  #define SPI_NOR_IO_MODE_EN_VOLATILE    BIT(1)
>>> +#define SPI_NOR_QUAD_PP                        BIT(2)
>>
>> No, as I previously said, SPI_NOR_QUAD_PP should be declared as a
>> info->flags, not as info->fixup_flags.
> 
> Sorry, I was confused as info->fixup_flags says "it indicates support
> that can be discovered via SFDP ideally, but can not be discovered
> for this particular flash because the SFDP table that indicates this
> support is not defined by the flash."
> 
Right, I've just sent a patch addressing this, hopefully is clearer now.
Check it here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20220810155924.1366072-1-tudor.ambarus@microchip.com/T/#u
> --
> Regards
> Sudip


-- 
Cheers,
ta