linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Enhance check for VRM in-flight request

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ee8a3a1f-413d-48f1-8267-3edfbb00273e@quicinc.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 09:34:10 +0530
From: "Maulik Shah (mkshah)" <quic_mkshah@...cinc.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio
	<konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <quic_collinsd@...cinc.com>, <quic_lsrao@...cinc.com>,
        <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Enhance check for VRM in-flight
 request

Hi,

On 2/15/2024 12:29 AM, Elliot Berman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 12:08:43AM -0600, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 10:18:08AM +0530, Maulik Shah wrote:
>>> Each RPMh VRM accelerator resource has 3 or 4 contiguous 4-byte aligned
>>> addresses associated with it. These control voltage, enable state, mode,
>>> and in legacy targets, voltage headroom. The current in-flight request
>>> checking logic looks for exact address matches. Requests for different
>>> addresses of the same RPMh resource as thus not detected as in-flight.
>>>
>>> Add new cmd-db API cmd_db_match_resource_addr() to enhance the in-flight
>>> request check for VRM requests by ignoring the address offset.
>>>
>>> This ensures that only one request is allowed to be in-flight for a given
>>> VRM resource. This is needed to avoid scenarios where request commands are
>>> carried out by RPMh hardware out-of-order leading to LDO regulator
>>> over-current protection triggering.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 658628e7ef78 ("drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: add RPMH controller for QCOM SoCs")
>>> cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Maulik Shah <quic_mkshah@...cinc.com>
>>
>> This says, "Elliot first certified the origin of the patch, then Maulik
>> took and certified the origin of the patch". But according to the From:
>> the author of the patch is you, Maulik.
>>
>> How was Elliot able to certify the patch's origin before you, when
>> you're the author?
>>
>> If the two of you collaborated, also add Co-developed-by: Elliot above
>> his s-o-b.
>>
> 
> Even my Co-developed-by is being generous :-) All I had done was copy
> the commit and resolve couple merge conflicts.
> 
> Maulik, you can swap my S-o-B for a:
> 
> Tested-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@...cinc.com> # sm8650-qrd
> 

Addressed in v4 to change to tested-by.

Thanks,
Maulik