linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci_am654: fix start loop index for TAP value parsing

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: <7054b3bb-de99-3fb0-5f17-78249f31c53f@ti.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:41:34 +0530
From:   Nitin Yadav <n-yadav@...com>
To:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
CC:     <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci_am654: fix start loop index for TAP value
 parsing

Hi Adrian,

On 26/10/23 12:33, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 26/10/23 10:00, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>> On 26/10/23 09:14, Nitin Yadav wrote:
>>> ti,otap-del-sel-legacy/ti,itap-del-sel-legacy passed from DT
>>> are currently ignored for all SD/MMC and eMMC modes. Fix this
>>> by making start loop index to MMC_TIMING_LEGACY.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 8ee5fc0e0b3be ("mmc: sdhci_am654: Update OTAPDLY writes")
>>>
>>
>> There isn't usually a blank line here
>>
>> Perhaps a Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org tag?
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nitin Yadav <n-yadav@...com>
>>
>> Nevertheless:
>>
>> Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> 
> Sorry, sent that prematurely - see comment below
> 
>>
>>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
>>> index 544aaaf5cb0f..aae9d255c6a1 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
>>> @@ -606,7 +606,7 @@ static int sdhci_am654_get_otap_delay(struct sdhci_host *host,
>>>  		return 0;
>>>  	}
>>>  
> 
> Isn't the MMC_TIMING_LEGACY information read at the top of
> sdhci_am654_get_otap_delay()?
Loop also take care of ITAP. Looks like at some point single property
ti,otap-del-sel was used for all modes and then we moved to one property
per mode:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200108150920.14547-3-faiz_abbas@ti.com
(since v5.7)
> 
>>> -	for (i = MMC_TIMING_MMC_HS; i <= MMC_TIMING_MMC_HS400; i++) {
>>> +	for (i = MMC_TIMING_LEGACY; i <= MMC_TIMING_MMC_HS400; i++) {
>>>  
>>>  		ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, td[i].otap_binding,
>>>  					       &sdhci_am654->otap_del_sel[i]);
>>
> 

-- 
Regards,
Nitin