linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2,1/2] mtd: spi-nor: giga: gd25lq64c: Disable quad mode according to bus width

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: <ecfe1bc6799755d1f2c6f94b8cb59b27@walle.cc>
Date:   Wed, 16 Aug 2023 14:37:07 +0200
From:   Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To:     Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
Cc:     Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>,
        "Miquel Raynal )" <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        "Richard Weinberger )" <richard@....at>,
        "Vignesh Raghavendra )" <vigneshr@...com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        cros-qcom-dts-watchers@...omium.org,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2,1/2] mtd: spi-nor: giga: gd25lq64c: Disable quad mode
 according to bus width

Hi,

>>>> like a fundamental problem and that commit 39d1e3340c73 ("mtd: 
>>>> spi-nor:
>>>> Fix clearing of QE bit on lock()/unlock()") is broken in that 
>>>> regard.
>>> 
>>> what's wrong with the mentioned commit?
>> 
>>         } else if (nor->params->quad_enable) {
>>                 /*
>>                  * If the Status Register 2 Read command (35h) is not
>>                  * supported, we should at least be sure we don't
>>                  * change the value of the SR2 Quad Enable bit.
>>                  *
>>                  * We can safely assume that when the Quad Enable 
>> method is
>>                  * set, the value of the QE bit is one, as a 
>> consequence of the
>>                  * nor->params->quad_enable() call.
>>                  *
>>                  * We can safely assume that the Quad Enable bit is 
>> present in
>>                  * the Status Register 2 at BIT(1). According to the 
>> JESD216
>>                  * revB standard, BFPT DWORDS[15], bits 22:20, the 
>> 16-bit
>>                  * Write Status (01h) command is available just for 
>> the cases
>>                  * in which the QE bit is described in SR2 at BIT(1).
>>                  */
>>                 sr_cr[1] = SR2_QUAD_EN_BIT1;
>>         } else {
>>                 sr_cr[1] = 0;
>>         }
>> 
>> "We can safely assume that when the Quad Enable method..". We cannot, 
>> if we
>> don't have 4 I/O lines. The quad_enable is just the op how to do it, 
>> but not
>> *if* can do it. It seems to be missing the same check as the
>> spi_nor_quad_enable(). But I'm not sure if it's that simple.
>> 
> 
> I see. Then extending the if condition should do the trick, as
> spi_nor_write_16bit_sr_and_check() is called after setup. Something
> like:
> 
> if (spi_nor_get_protocol_width(nor->read_proto) == 4 &&
>     spi_nor_get_protocol_width(nor->write_proto) == 4 &&
>     nor->params->quad_enable)
> 
> Is this what Hsin-Yi is hitting?

Hopefully :)

-michael