linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] media: i2c: imx219: fix msr access command sequence

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]

Message-ID: <CAHCN7xLoJK+_=+ASL=P8x=E3ALY-Xw=+_Zg+q0Za32kgvm5iQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:01:12 -0500
From: Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>, 
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org, 
	Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, Andrey Konovalov <andrey.konovalov@...aro.org>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Naushir Patuck <naush@...pberrypi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] media: i2c: imx219: fix msr access command sequence

On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 12:55 PM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 06:29:49PM +0100, Dave Stevenson wrote:
>
> > > > ---
> > > > I got the report of this third hand, I don't have a device and can't
> > > > test this. I do wonder why the RPis get away with the sequence that
> > > > seemingly doesn't work for the guy that reported this to me. My theory
> > > > is either that they noticed the sequence was wrong while adding some
> > > > other MSR access that is needed on this board while either cross
> > > > checking the values written or because the other MSR accesses didn't
> > > > take effect.
> >
> > Did the change fix it for the reporter? We're using the driver with no
> > changes to the register settings cf mainline.
> > Why it works on the Pi but not on a Microchip board is likely to be
> > something quite subtle.

I have two different platforms which can use this sensor.  I can try
to test it this weekend and I'll report back my findings.

adam
>
> I've asked, maybe it turns out to just be the first of my suggestions,
> and they noticed it was not matching in passing. They did introduce two
> additional MSR accesses, both outside of the range documented in the
> datasheets I could find online. They did have explanations for what those
> undocumented MSRs did (0x5040 and 0x5041) in the mail I got, but given
> it's third hand info to me, I dunno if we have the datasheet etc. I'll
> try to find out some more next week.
>
> Thanks,
> Conor.