[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8734bnx8u6.fsf@bootlin.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 09:25:53 +0200
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Gabor Juhos <j4g8y7@...il.com>, Md Sadre Alam
<quic_mdalam@...cinc.com>, Varadarajan Narayanan
<quic_varada@...cinc.com>, Sricharan Ramabadhran
<quic_srichara@...cinc.com>, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lakshmi Sowjanya D
<quic_laksd@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] spi: spi-qpic-snand: avoid memory corruption
Hi Mark,
On 25/06/2025 at 23:43:23 +01, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 10:22:48PM +0200, Gabor Juhos wrote:
>> The 'spi-qpic-nand' driver may cause memory corruption under some
>> circumstances. The first patch in the series changes the driver to
>> avoid that, whereas the second adds some sanity checks to the common
>> QPIC code in order to make detecting such errors easier in the future.
>>
>> Preferably, the two patches should go along in via the SPI tree.
>> It is not a strict requirement though, in the case the second patch
>> gets included separately through the MTD tree it reveals the bug
>> which is fixed in the first patch.
>
> Miquel, are you OK with this plan for merging via the SPI tree?
Absolutely, my Ack is already there, thanks for asking.
Miquèl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists