linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 00/21] nvmem: core: introduce NVMEM layouts

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]

Date:   Thu, 05 Jan 2023 13:11:37 +0100
From:   Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tq-group.com>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/21] nvmem: core: introduce NVMEM layouts

Hi Alexander,

thanks for debugging. I'm not yet sure what is going wrong, so
I have some more questions below.

>> This causes the following errors on existing boards (imx8mq-tqma8mq-
>> mba8mx.dtb):
>> root@...a8-common:~# uname -r
>> 6.2.0-rc2-next-20230105
>> 
>> > OF: /soc@0: could not get #nvmem-cell-cells for /soc@...us@...00000/
>> efuse@...50000/soc-uid@4
>> > OF: /soc@...us@...00000/ethernet@...e0000: could not get #nvmem-cell-cells
>> for /soc@...us@...00000/efuse@...50000/mac-address@90
>> 
>> These are caused because '#nvmem-cell-cells = <0>;' is not explicitly 
>> set in
>> DT.
>> 
>> > TI DP83867 30be0000.ethernet-1:0e: error -EINVAL: failed to get nvmem cell
>> io_impedance_ctrl
>> > TI DP83867: probe of 30be0000.ethernet-1:0e failed with error -22
>> 
>> These are caused because of_nvmem_cell_get() now returns -EINVAL 
>> instead of -
>> ENODEV if the requested nvmem cell is not available.

What do you mean with not available? Not yet available because of probe
order?

> Should we just assume #nvmem-cell-cells = <0> by default? I guess it's
> a safe assumption.

Actually, that's what patch 2/21 is for.

Alexander, did you verify that the EINVAL is returned by
of_parse_phandle_with_optional_args()?

-michael