linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] mtd: spi-nor: Improve reporting for software reset failures

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]

Date:   Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:02:20 +0300
From:   Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To:     Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>,
        AceLan Kao <acelan.kao@...onical.com>
CC:     Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mtd: spi-nor: Improve reporting for software reset failures

Am 26. Oktober 2023 16:39:54 OESZ schrieb Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>:
>On Thu, Oct 26 2023, AceLan Kao wrote:
>
>> From: "Chia-Lin Kao (AceLan)" <acelan.kao@...onical.com>
>>
>> When the software reset command isn't supported, we now report it
>> as an informational message(dev_info) instead of a warning(dev_warn).
>> This adjustment helps avoid unnecessary alarm and confusion regarding
>> software reset capabilities.
>
>I still think the soft reset command deserves a warn, and not an info.
>Because it _is_ a bad thing if you need to soft reset and are unable to
>do so. Your bootloader (or linux if you rmmod and modprobe again) might
>not be able to detect the flash mode and operate it properly. 

agreed.. but.. 

>I think we should just not unconditionally run this and instead only
>call it when the flash reset is not connected -- that is only call this
>under a check for SNOR_F_BROKEN_RESET, like we do for 4-byte addressing
>mode.

.. keep in mind that this is a restriction of the flash controller. the Intel one seems to be the only affected one (for now) and it's doing a reset (according to mika) on its own. 

snor_broken_reset is a property of the flash. 


>I don't have a strong opposition to this patch but I do think it is
>fixing the problem in the wrong place.

if the flash controller doesn't let you issue a soft reset (or does so on its own), what's the fix?

-michael