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: <3a6a756c-3393-abf7-3ddf-7dd44c8ea160@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 17 Mar 2023 15:34:44 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        MTD Maling List <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Probing devices by their less-specific "compatible" bindings
 (here: brcmnand)

On 17/03/2023 11:02, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> Hi, I just spent few hours debugging hidden hw lockup and I need to
> consult driver core code behaviour.
> 
> I have a BCM4908 SoC based board with a NAND controller on it.
> 
> 
> ### Hardware binding
> 
> Hardware details:
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/bcmbca/bcm4908.dtsi
> 
> Relevant part:
> nand-controller@...0 {
> 	compatible = "brcm,nand-bcm63138", "brcm,brcmnand-v7.1", "brcm,brcmnand";

(...)

> ### Problem
> 
> As first Linux probes my hardware using the "brcm,nand-bcm63138"
> compatibility string driver bcm63138_nand.c. That's good.
> 
> It that fails however (.probe() returns an error) then Linux core starts
> probing using drivers for less specific bindings.
> 
> In my case probing with the "brcm,brcmnand" string driver brcmstb_nand.c
> results in ignoring SoC specific bits and causes a hardware lockup. Hw
> isn't initialized properly and writel_relaxed(0x00000009, base + 0x04)
> just make it hang.
> 
> That obviously isn't an acceptable behavior for me. So I'm wondering
> what's going on wrong here.
> 
> Should Linux avoid probing with less-specific compatible strings?

Why? If less-specific compatible is there, it means device is compatible
with it and it should work.

> Or should I not claim hw to be "brcm,brcmnand" compatible if it REQUIRES
> SoC-specific handling?

As you pointed this compatible does not work for your device, so they
are not compatible.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ