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]

Date:   Tue, 28 Mar 2023 09:27:55 +0200
From:   Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@...s.st.com>
To:     Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
CC:     <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

Hello Miquel,

On 3/27/23 13:06, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
> 
> 
> 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.
> 

I can send a V3 with cc tag added as per Tudor's suggestion.
Or cc tag will be added when the patches will be applied?

Regards,
Christophe Kerello.

>>
>>>
>>>> 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