linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 07/12] nvmem: microchip-otpc: Add missing register definitions

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: <f3e37d0f-fe07-42df-a3cc-948155b76e20@tuxon.dev>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2024 15:05:01 +0300
From: claudiu beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>
To: Christian Melki <christian.melki@...ata.com>,
 Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
 "moderated list:MICROCHIP OTPC DRIVER"
 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 07/12] nvmem: microchip-otpc: Add missing register
 definitions



On 02.09.2024 11:08, Alexander Dahl wrote:
> Hello Claudiu,
> 
> Am Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 06:33:50PM +0300 schrieb claudiu beznea:
>>
>>
>> On 28.08.2024 11:14, Alexander Dahl wrote:
>>> Hello Claudiu,
>>>
>>> Am Sat, Aug 24, 2024 at 06:54:02PM +0300 schrieb claudiu beznea:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 21.08.2024 13:59, Alexander Dahl wrote:
>>>>> According to datasheets DS60001765B for SAMA7G5 and DS60001579G for
>>>>> SAM9X60.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <ada@...rsis.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c b/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c
>>>>> index b8ed7412dbca..4630e96243ac 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c
>>>>> @@ -21,9 +21,24 @@
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_AR			(0x8)
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_SR			(0xc)
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_SR_READ		BIT(6)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_IER			(0x10)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_IDR			(0x14)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_IMR			(0x18)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_ISR			(0x1C)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_ISR_COERR		BIT(13)
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_HR			(0x20)
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_HR_SIZE		GENMASK(15, 8)
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_DR			(0x24)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_BAR			(0x30)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_CAR			(0x34)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_UHC0R			(0x50)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_UHC1R			(0x54)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_UID0R			(0x60)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_UID1R			(0x64)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_UID2R			(0x68)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_UID3R			(0x6C)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_WPMR			(0xE4)
>>>>> +#define MCHP_OTPC_WPSR			(0xE8)
>>>>
>>>> Are all these used in driver?
>>>
>>> Not all, but some.  What are you implying?  Only add register
>>> definitions actually used in the driver? 
>>
>> Yes!
> 
> Okay.
> 
> So if I drop the patch with the warnings on driver probe you did not
> like (checking for pre probe error conditions in interrupt register
> for example), then it is just the MCHP_OTPC_UID0R and I would squash
> that one definition in the last patch adding the nvmem for the UID
> then, okay?

OK for me.

The idea would be to keep just what is used.

Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea

> 
> Greets
> Alex
> 
>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> Less code to maintain. If it's not used there is no meaning to have it.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Those register offsets won't change, but helped us when debugging.
>>> Debug code (e.g. register dump) is not part of the patch series.
>>>
>>> Greets
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>  
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_NAME			"mchp-otpc"
>>>>>  #define MCHP_OTPC_SIZE			(11 * 1024)
>>