linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Add SDHCI_QUIRK2_SUPPRESS_V1P8

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: <538ac62f-c1b1-4d58-9ef3-0a4ef2331734@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 08:43:52 +0300
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
CC: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Josua Mayer
	<josua@...id-run.com>, <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Francesco Dolcini
	<francesco@...cini.it>, Hiago De Franco <hiagofranco@...il.com>, Moteen Shah
	<m-shah@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Add SDHCI_QUIRK2_SUPPRESS_V1P8_ENA

On 07/05/2025 13:14, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Mon, 5 May 2025 at 23:24, Mendez, Judith <jm@...com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On 4/24/2025 1:00 PM, Judith Mendez wrote:
>>> There are MMC boot failures seen with V1P8_SIGNAL_ENA on Kingston eMMC and
>>> Microcenter/Patriot SD cards on am62* Sitara K3 boards due to the HS200
>>> initialization sequence involving V1P8_SIGNAL_ENA. Since V1P8_SIGNAL_ENA
>>> is optional for eMMC and only affects timing for host controllers using
>>> ti,am62-sdhci compatible so far, add a new platform data structure for am62
>>> compatible and append the new SDHCI_QUIRK2_SUPPRESS_V1P8_ENA quirk.
>>>
>>> This fix was previously merged in the kernel, but was reverted due
>>> to the "heuristics for enabling the quirk"[0]. This issue is adressed
>>> in this patch series by adding the quirk based on compatible string,
>>> ensuring the quirk is never applied to devices with internal LDOs, then
>>> V1P8_SIGNAL_ENA also has a voltage component tied to it.
>>
>> Gentle ping on this, are there any comments or any issues with this
>> type of implementation?
> 
> It looks reasonable to me. Although, in general I think we are trying
> to avoid adding new sdhci quirks, perhaps there are good reasons to do
> it in this case.

Yes, we want to avoid new quirks in sdhci.c.

Judith, can you do it like in V3? i.e. in sdhci_am654.c with
SDHCI_AM654_QUIRK_SUPPRESS_V1P8_ENA and sdhci_am654_start_signal_voltage_switch()