linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mtd: rawnand: rockchip-nand-controller: add skipbbt option

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1618382560.2326931.1689261435022.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date:   Thu, 13 Jul 2023 17:17:15 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Johan Jonker <jbx6244@...il.com>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, heiko@...ech.de,
        linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
        yifeng zhao <yifeng.zhao@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mtd: rawnand: rockchip-nand-controller: add
 skipbbt option

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> 
>> > For the boot I think I proposed a DT property. I don't remember how far
>> > the discussion went.
>> 
>> Is there a web link of that discussion?
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mtd/20230609104426.3901df54@xps-13/
> 
> Maybe the term "DT property" did not appear but that's what I had in
> mind :-) I don't know if it must be a chip or a partition property.
> 
> Richard, here is where I would like your feedback, I am kind of opposed
> to a "skip_bbt" module parameter. It's not a strong opinion, if you
> think it's fine I'm open.
> 
> I would rather prefer a DT property which says "do not use the
> standard pattern".

Yes, please no new module parameters. A module parameter should only affect
the behavior of the driver itself (e.g. debug mode) but not be device specific.
We made this mistake in the past too often. :-(
A single driver can serve more devices. Therefore IMHO controlling this via DT
makes perfectly sense.

Thanks,
//richard