linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFT 10/10] arm64: dts: microchip: sparx5

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

Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 14:11:51 +0200
From: Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>, Claudiu Beznea
	<claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof
 Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Lars Povlsen
	<lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>, Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>,
	<UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Bjarni Jonasson <bjarni.jonasson@...rochip.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT 10/10] arm64: dts: microchip: sparx5_pcb135: drop
 duplicated NOR flash

Hi Krzysztof,

On Mon, 2024-04-01 at 17:37 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> Since beginning the DTS extended the SPI0 in two places adding two SPI
> muxes, each with same SPI NOR flash.  Both used exactly the same
> chip-selects, so this was clearly buggy code.  Without checking in
> datasheet, assume device has only one SPI NOR flash, so code was
> duplicated.
> 
> Fixes dtc W=1 warnings:
> 
>   sparx5_pcb135_board.dtsi:92.10-96.4: Warning (unique_unit_address_if_enabled):
> /axi@...000000/spi@...104000/flash@0: duplicate unit-address (also used in node
> /axi@...000000/spi@...104000/spi@0)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
> 
> ---
> 
> Not tested on hardware
> ---
>  .../boot/dts/microchip/sparx5_pcb135_board.dtsi  | 16 ----------------
>  1 file changed, 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/microchip/sparx5_pcb135_board.dtsi
> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/microchip/sparx5_pcb135_board.dtsi
> index 20016efb3656..d64e642e3873 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/microchip/sparx5_pcb135_board.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/microchip/sparx5_pcb135_board.dtsi
> @@ -96,22 +96,6 @@ flash@0 {
>         };
>  };
> 
> -&spi0 {
> -       status = "okay";
> -       spi@0 {
> -               compatible = "spi-mux";
> -               mux-controls = <&mux>;
> -               #address-cells = <1>;
> -               #size-cells = <0>;
> -               reg = <0>; /* CS0 */
> -               flash@9 {
> -                       compatible = "jedec,spi-nor";
> -                       spi-max-frequency = <8000000>;
> -                       reg = <0x9>; /* SPI */
> -               };
> -       };
> -};
> -

I also tested this, and no surprise: same comment as for the pcb134 patch...

>  &sgpio1 {
>         status = "okay";
>         microchip,sgpio-port-ranges = <24 31>;
> --
> 2.34.1
> 

Best Regards
Steen