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: <20230731122212.3f64d0dc5adf8d23eee1de62@hugovil.com>
Date:   Mon, 31 Jul 2023 12:22:12 -0400
From:   Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@...ovil.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        conor+dt@...nel.org, jirislaby@...nel.org, jringle@...dpoint.com,
        isaac.true@...onical.com, jesse.sung@...onical.com,
        l.perczak@...lintechnologies.com, tomasz.mon@...lingroup.com,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@...onoff.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Lech Perczak <lech.perczak@...lingroup.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/10] serial: sc16is7xx: mark IOCONTROL register as
 volatile

On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 17:50:40 +0200
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 10:23:34AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> > From: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@...onoff.com>
> > 
> > Bit SRESET (3) is cleared when a reset operation is completed. Having
> > the IOCONTROL register as non-volatile will always read SRESET as 1,
> > which is incorrect.
> > 
> > Also, if IOCONTROL register is not a volatile register, the upcoming
> > patch "serial: sc16is7xx: fix regression with GPIO configuration"
> > doesn't work when setting some shared GPIO lines as modem control
> > lines.
> > 
> > Therefore mark IOCONTROL register as a volatile register.
> > 
> > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 6.1.x
> 
> Why 6.1.y?  What commit does this fix?
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@...onoff.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Lech Perczak <lech.perczak@...lingroup.com>
> > Tested-by: Lech Perczak <lech.perczak@...lingroup.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/tty/serial/sc16is7xx.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/sc16is7xx.c b/drivers/tty/serial/sc16is7xx.c
> > index 8ae2afc76a9b..306ae512b38a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/sc16is7xx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/sc16is7xx.c
> > @@ -488,6 +488,7 @@ static bool sc16is7xx_regmap_volatile(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
> >  	case SC16IS7XX_TXLVL_REG:
> >  	case SC16IS7XX_RXLVL_REG:
> >  	case SC16IS7XX_IOSTATE_REG:
> > +	case SC16IS7XX_IOCONTROL_REG:
> >  		return true;
> >  	default:
> >  		break;
> 
> Is this the same as this change:
> 	https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230724034727.17335-1-hui.wang@canonical.com/
> 
> confused,

Hi Greg,
yes this is the same.

You simply accepted an exact equivalent of my patch by someone else in
your tree, no confusion there.

I will remove this patch from my series and rebase it on your tree
gregkh_tty/tty-next.

Hugo.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ