linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix V1P8_SIGNAL_ENA and HIGH_SPEED

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: <bc09c5b8-ce53-4d43-86af-16b17f214d5b@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 17:56:59 -0500
From: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
To: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>,
        Hiago De Franco
	<hiagofranco@...il.com>
CC: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Josua Mayer
	<josua@...id-run.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Moteen Shah
	<m-shah@...com>,
        Hiago De Franco <hiago.franco@...adex.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix V1P8_SIGNAL_ENA and HIGH_SPEED_ENA

Hi Francesco,

On 4/14/25 9:57 AM, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 09:37:53AM -0500, Judith Mendez wrote:
>> Hi Francesco,
>>
>> On 4/14/25 1:51 AM, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
>>> Hello Judith
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 04:55:39PM -0500, Judith Mendez wrote:
>>>> My understanding was that we do not like adding new DT properties if
>>>> we can find a way to apply the quirk in the driver.
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> If this implementation flies with the maintainers, then we can go back to DT
>>>> property implementation.
>>>
>>> Not sure if this is clear, but this patch is NOT working according to
>>> our tests, we would need to fix it in a different way.
>>
>> Not sure if you are following the thread with Hiago, but we are fixing
>> it a different way; add a new DT property: "ti,suppress-v1p8-ena" for SD
>> card which allows us to have granular control on when v1p8 is suppressed
>> for MMC1.
>>
>> With this method, we make sure the quirk is never applied to your board (;
> 
> My board needs the quirk ;-)
> It was not clear to me that this change was going to be added to this
> patch, because without it's not working.
> 
> Thanks for the clarification.


Understood, Ok seems like we are just waiting on Adrian or another MMC
maintainer to comment before sending v2 with Hiago's suggestion,
thanks.

~ Judith