linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v5 2/3] scsi: ufs: Allow platform vendors to set rtt

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: Thu, 23 May 2024 13:09:25 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: "hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>
CC: "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>, Bart Van Assche
	<bvanassche@....org>, Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>, Peter Wang
	<peter.wang@...iatek.com>, "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 2/3] scsi: ufs: Allow platform vendors to set rtt

> On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 03:58:25PM +0300, Avri Altman wrote:
> > Allow platform vendors to take precedence having their own rtt
> > negotiation mechanism.  This makes sense because the host controller's
> > nortt characteristic may vary among vendors.
> 
> Platform vendors have absolutelyt no business saying anything.
> 
> Fortunately that's not what you're actually doing, but I really don't understand
> your vendor fetish.
It was a specific request from MTK to allow override their host controller capabilities.

Thanks,
Avri