linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mmc: sdhci: Defer probe if regulator

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:29:41 -0600
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Lucas Stach <dev@...xeye.de>
CC:	Pavan Kunapuli <pkunapuli@...dia.com>, linux@....linux.org.uk,
	cjb@...top.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mmc: sdhci: Defer probe if regulator_get fails

On 10/23/2012 01:57 AM, Lucas Stach wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 23.10.2012, 12:49 +0530 schrieb Pavan Kunapuli:
>> vmmc and vqmmc regulators control the voltage to
>> the host and device. Defer the probe if either of
>> them is not registered.
>
> Does this work with boards where we don't have any MMC supplies? Or are
> we just deferring the probe indefinitely there?
> 
> For boards that power MMC unconditionally, are we supposed to add dummy
> regulators to make them work with this patchset?

I believe that dummy (fixed) regulators are supposed to be provided in
all cases where the platform doesn't actually have one. The fact that
everything worked OK without them before this patch was most likely a
mistake/accident.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/