linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] pinctrl: intel: High impedance impl. and cleanups

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: <ZtIUwWavMQRXDOGN@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 21:51:45 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] pinctrl: intel: High impedance impl. and cleanups

On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 07:56:11AM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> On 28.08.2024 22:00, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 09:38:33PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> We would need a high impedance implementation for a quirk, so here it
> >> is. While doing this series I also noticed a couple of opportunities
> >> to clean up, hence two more patches (1st and 5th).
> > 
> > Sorry it took a while to actually start implementing the quirk for your case.
> > Here I'm asking for the following things:
> > 
> > 1) what is the marketing name of the device you have problems with?
> > (I believe it's available on the free market, correct?);
> 
> Device is a dirt-cheap mini pc, marketed as Chatreey T9. It's available
> on the free market, right. Dmesg says:
> DMI: Default string Default string/Default string, BIOS ADLN.M6.SODIMM.ZB.CY.015 08/08/2023
> 
> > 2) does it have any BIOS updates and, if it has, does it fix the issue?
> > 
> No BIOS updates.
> 
> > 3) can you apply patches 2,3,4,5 from this series (the first one is buggy and
> > not needed for you) and replace the hack I mentioned earlier with
> > 
> > 	ret = intel_gpio_set_high_impedance(pctrl, 3);
> > 	if (ret)
> > 		return ret;
> > 
> > somewhere at the end of intel_pinctrl_probe()?
> > 
> > Does it still work as expected?
> > 
> I will check.

There is a v2 to test, you can take entire series, or for-next branch of Intel
pin control tree

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pinctrl/intel.git/log/?h=for-next

Thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko