linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: syscon: Set max_register_is_0 when syscon points to a single register

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240829050442.77v54yjvq44ja2dd@cresting>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 00:04:42 -0500
From: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <afd@...com>, <bb@...com>, <d-gole@...com>,
        Jan Dakinevich
	<jan.dakinevich@...utedevices.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: syscon: Set max_register_is_0 when syscon points to
 a single register

On 21:26-20240828, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 09:44:34AM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> 
> > This is a patch for syscon, not regmap. I am a bit confused as to what
> > objection beyond the "Fixes" usage (which I can drop
> > in a respin) you may have here, will appreciate if you are NAKing the
> > patch and on what rationale.
> 
> > I understand that regmap considers the max_register usage entirely
> > optional, but syscon does already use it (my patch doesn't introduce
> > it). I am just getting syscon to catchup to what regmap already
> > provides.
> 
> If you are absolutely confident that all syscon users know how big their
> regmap is then modulo the claim that it's a fix for an unrelated patch
> which doesn't change the behaviour for these regmaps at all then it's
> fine.

Thanks for clarifying - I understand now.. I will drop the fixes tag
and refresh the patch with appropriate wording - but, to the best of
my search[1] ("Absolutely confident" is a pretty strong terminology for
any patch ;)) there is expectation of max_registers being enforced..
based on what the driver does today.

[1] https://gist.github.com/nmenon/d537096d041fa553565fba7577d2cd24 ->
 the pattern seems relatively controlled problem that existing code
 as far as I can see doesn't seem to mis-behave.

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D