linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nvmem: include bit index in cell sysfs file name

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: <20240124231120.562f06f3@xps-13>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 23:11:20 +0100
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>, "Srinivas Kandagatla"
 <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>, regressions@...ts.linux.dev,
 Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>, "Chen-Yu Tsai"
 <wenst@...omium.org>, "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 asahi@...ts.linux.dev, "Sven Peter" <sven@...npeter.dev>, "Michael Walle"
 <michael@...le.cc>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvmem: include bit index in cell sysfs file name

Hi Arnd,

arnd@...db.de wrote on Wed, 24 Jan 2024 20:49:53 +0100:

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024, at 18:22, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> > arnd@...nel.org wrote on Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:34:10 +0100:
> >  
> >> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> >> 
> >> 
> >> As far as I can tell, this is a problem for any device with multiple cells on
> >> different bits of the same address. Avoid the issue by changing the file name
> >> to include the first bit number.  
> >
> > There is only one bit number right? We are talking about byte offsets
> > so this value can only range from 0 to 7? If we understand each other
> > correctly then why not, I'm fine with the extra ",0" thing.  
> 
> On the Apple M1, the nvmem registers are 32 bit wide, so the
> bit numbers can go up to 31. I can imagine some system using
> 64-bit registers, but it's unlikely to be higher than that.

In this case we will soon or later have a problem again. Can we include
the full offset of the bit and not just the first digit?

Thanks,
Miquèl