Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <e5c4c61c-a3a3-97d0-ad50-8c5b345dc334@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 May 2023 21:43:59 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.10.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] platform/x86: think-lmi: Correct NVME password
 handling
Content-Language: en-US, nl
To:     Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
Cc:     "markgross@kernel.org" <markgross@kernel.org>,
        "platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org" 
        <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
 <20230525193132.3727-1-mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
 <20230525193132.3727-3-mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
 <17963a3d-996f-4bb8-918e-aadba15be9bc@app.fastmail.com>
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <17963a3d-996f-4bb8-918e-aadba15be9bc@app.fastmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 5/25/23 21:39, Mark Pearson wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> 
> My apologies - I completely forgot to add the v2 tag on this patch series...had a complete brain fart.

No worries I did not even notice the v2 was missing,
my brain automatically added it :)
 
> I assume I should resend them all - correctly named.

Well I have some review remarks on patch 5/5, it would be good if you can address those (if you agree with them) and then lets jump straight to v3 to avoid confusion ?

> I also have no idea why they showed up out of order...I'm blaming that one on the email server.

The out of order thing is normal, this sometimes happens with email.

> Sorry :(

Again no worries / no problem ...

Regards,

Hans


> On Thu, May 25, 2023, at 3:31 PM, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> NVME passwords identifier have been standardised across the Lenovo
>> systems and now use udrp and adrp (user and admin level) instead of
>> unvp and mnvp.
>>
>> This should apparently be backwards compatible.
>>
>> Also cleaned up so the index is set to a default of 1 rather than 0
>> as this just makes more sense (there is no device 0).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>
>> ---
>> Changes in V2: None. Version bumped in series
>>
>>  drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c | 8 ++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
>> index c7e98fbe7c3d..1c02958035ad 100644
>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
>> @@ -456,9 +456,9 @@ static ssize_t new_password_store(struct kobject *kobj,
>>  				sprintf(pwd_type, "mhdp%d", setting->index);
>>  		} else if (setting == tlmi_priv.pwd_nvme) {
>>  			if (setting->level == TLMI_LEVEL_USER)
>> -				sprintf(pwd_type, "unvp%d", setting->index);
>> +				sprintf(pwd_type, "udrp%d", setting->index);
>>  			else
>> -				sprintf(pwd_type, "mnvp%d", setting->index);
>> +				sprintf(pwd_type, "adrp%d", setting->index);
>>  		} else {
>>  			sprintf(pwd_type, "%s", setting->pwd_type);
>>  		}
>> @@ -1524,6 +1524,10 @@ static int tlmi_analyze(void)
>>  		if (!tlmi_priv.pwd_nvme)
>>  			goto fail_clear_attr;
>>
>> +		/* Set default hdd/nvme index to 1 as there is no device 0 */
>> +		tlmi_priv.pwd_hdd->index = 1;
>> +		tlmi_priv.pwd_nvme->index = 1;
>> +
>>  		if (tlmi_priv.pwdcfg.core.password_state & TLMI_HDD_PWD) {
>>  			/* Check if PWD is configured and set index to first drive found */
>>  			if (tlmi_priv.pwdcfg.ext.hdd_user_password ||
>> -- 
>> 2.40.1
>