linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: rawnand: stm32_fmc2: use timings.mode instead of checking tRC

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]

Message-ID: <70d0a8b6-62c2-fa3e-df5c-f86ba75484d0@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 27 Mar 2023 12:06:58 +0100
From:   Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@...s.st.com>,
        richard@....at, vigneshr@...com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mtd: rawnand: stm32_fmc2: use timings.mode instead
 of checking tRC_min



On 3/27/23 11:43, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Tudor,
> 
> tudor.ambarus@...aro.org wrote on Mon, 27 Mar 2023 11:30:51 +0100:
> 
>> On 3/27/23 10:47, Christophe Kerello wrote:
>>> This patch is using timings.mode value instead of checking tRC_min timing
>>> for EDO mode support.
>>>   
>>
>> Fixes and Cc to stable here too, as you'd like to have this backported
>> as well, don't you?
> 
> Actually the reason why Christophe split this into two patches is
> because timings.mode was introduced rather lately, he wanted the same
> patch to apply on all stable kernels, he actually asked for that split
> and I agreed (another solution would have been to send this current
> patch to Linus and have the other version sent to stable, but it
> requires a bit of scheduling on both ends).
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20230327101156.0ec2816a@xps-13/T/#t

Right, I understood that from the beginning. If it were to me, I would
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org #v5.4+ for the first patch and
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org #v5.10+ for the second.

So first would be alone just in v5.4, and starting with v5.10 we'll have
both and we'll mimic what we currently have in upstream mainline.

> 
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@...s.st.com>  
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
>>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c
>>> index 3abb63d00a0b..9e74bcd90aaa 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/stm32_fmc2_nand.c
>>> @@ -1531,7 +1531,7 @@ static int stm32_fmc2_nfc_setup_interface(struct nand_chip *chip, int chipnr,
>>>  	if (IS_ERR(sdrt))
>>>  		return PTR_ERR(sdrt);
>>>  
>>> -	if (sdrt->tRC_min < 30000)
>>> +	if (conf->timings.mode > 3)
>>>  		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>>  
>>>  	if (chipnr == NAND_DATA_IFACE_CHECK_ONLY)  
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Miquèl