linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: dwc3: drop 'quirk' suffix at snps,host-vbus-glitches-quirk

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, 8 Feb 2024 22:28:22 +0000
From: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
CC: Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
        Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: dwc3: drop 'quirk' suffix at
 snps,host-vbus-glitches-quirk

On Thu, Feb 08, 2024, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 05:14:01PM -0500, Frank Li wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 10:05:23PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 05:00:17PM -0500, Frank Li wrote:
> > > > Since dt maintainer give comments at old thread
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20240119213130.3147517-1-Frank.Li@nxp.com/
> > > > 
> > > > The patch v4 already merged.
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20240124152525.3910311-1-Frank.Li@nxp.com/
> > > > 
> > > > So submit new patch to rename snps,host-vbus-glitches-quirk to
> > > > snps,host-vbus-glitches to align dt maintainer's comments.
> > > 
> > > I thought the last comment left on the v1 was Thinh agreeing that a
> > > DT property was not needed here and we should be able to apply this
> > > conditionally?
> > 
> > I don't think so. This is workaround. We can use this track which chip
> > actually need this. If some year later, such chips already end of life.
> > We have chance to clear up these code. Otherwise, it will keep there for
> > ever.
> 
> > And I am not sure that the side effect for other chips. Workaround should
> > be applied as less as possible.
> 
> I'd rather do it unconditionally if we can, but if you and Thinh think
> that we cannot do it unconditionally then sure, keep the property.
> 

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant I agree that we don't need a new quirk
property. If anything, it should be safer to keep vbus disabled before
handing over to xhci driver. We should be able to do this
unconditionally.

BR,
Thinh