linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 3/6] i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Add a quirk to set PIO mode

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: <9fbbefde-443d-458b-b2a7-b8e0c90af1bd@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:10:50 +0300
From: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
 Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc: Guruvendra Punugupati <Guruvendra.Punugupati@....com>,
 Krishnamoorthi M <krishnamoorthi.m@....com>, linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 3/6] i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Add a quirk to set PIO
 mode

On 8/19/24 9:41 AM, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
>> I can add an additional check with the CPU ID and distinguish them(so
>> the quirk gets applied to the affected HW versions) and just not
>> restrict to X86_VENDOR_AMD, would that be fine with you?
>>
>> OTOH, Since these are quirks (where its a broken hardware problems)
>> and the idea you suggested is related to driver data (where driver
>> data is meant to store private information about the device)
>>
>> static const struct acpi_device_id i3c_hci_acpi_match[] = {
>>       {"AMDI1234", HCI_QUIRK_PIO_MODE | HCI_QUIRK_OD_PP_TIMING |
>> HCI_QUIRK_RESP_BUF_THLD},
>>       {}
>> };
>>
>> does that not conflict? quirk vs driver data?
>>
>> I am OK to implement it the way you prefer :-)
> 
> Jarkko, any feedback on this?
> 
Sorry, forgot to reply... What do you mean about conflict? So if driver 
data would pass quirk bits as above and set only to unique ACPI ID 
specific to that HW then there is no reason to check CPU ID later in the 
code.