linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: aspeed: bletchley: remove WDTRST1 assertion from wdt1

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: <8bf232de1d4254afc408b415d3476c2c2183a4ac.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 17:03:26 +1030
From: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
To: Cosmo Chou <chou.cosmo@...il.com>, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, 
	conor+dt@...nel.org, joel@....id.au
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	cosmo.chou@...ntatw.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: aspeed: bletchley: remove WDTRST1 assertion
 from wdt1

On Thu, 2025-10-16 at 13:27 +0800, Cosmo Chou wrote:
> Remove the external signal configuration from wdt1 to prevent the
> WDTRST1 pin from being asserted during watchdog resets.

Yes, this is certainly the immediate impact of the patch.

But what's the motivation? And if asserting WDTRST1 was the wrong thing
to be doing, why was it done to start with?

Please address both questions in an update to the commit message.

Thanks,

Andrew