linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: core: Add DWC31 version 2.00a controller

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240307020153.ll37lvuy7ftxnohx@synopsys.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 02:01:57 +0000
From: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>
To: Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>
CC: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: core: Add DWC31 version 2.00a controller

On Fri, Mar 01, 2024, Wesley Cheng wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 3/1/2024 1:45 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 01:35:54PM -0800, Wesley Cheng wrote:
> > > Add revision value for identifying DWC31 version 2.00a based controllers.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/usb/dwc3/core.h | 1 +
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.h b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.h
> > > index df544ec730d2..f3bbbc1947bd 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.h
> > > @@ -1259,6 +1259,7 @@ struct dwc3 {
> > >   #define DWC31_REVISION_170A	0x3137302a
> > >   #define DWC31_REVISION_180A	0x3138302a
> > >   #define DWC31_REVISION_190A	0x3139302a
> > > +#define DWC31_REVISION_200A	0x3230302a
> > 
> > What code uses this define?
> > 
> 
> Don't think there is anything within the DWC3 core that would be different
> specifically for 2.00a versus previous revisions. (so far)
> 
> > Why add a define that is not used?
> > 
> 
> There is a running list of all the DWC3 revisions.  Not all of them are
> being used, so my understanding was that we're just keeping track of all
> possible version values that can be read from the DWC3 version HW register.
> If this is the not the case, maybe we can just leave this out until we find
> a need to add it.
> 

Greg already picked this up, so it's fine. But I would prefer to only
define new macros when they are needed. There are a lot of versions and
configurations we don't list in dwc3.

Thanks,
Thinh