linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: core: Resolve supply earlier

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

Date:	Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:11:01 +0200
From:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: core: Resolve supply earlier

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:03:00PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 04:22:35PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * set_machine_constraints() needs the supply to be resolved in order
> > +	 * to support querying the current voltage in bypass mode. Resolve it
> > +	 * here to more easily handle deferred probing.
> > +	 */
> > +	ret = regulator_resolve_supply(rdev);
> > +	if (ret < 0)
> > +		goto scrub;
> 
> This shouldn't be a hard dependency: most regulators won't be in bypass
> mode or otherwise depend on their parents enough to need this.

I had initially proposed to resolve the supply only when necessary
during regulator_get_voltage() when checking for bypass, perhaps that
would after all be more appropriate here?

Alternatively I guess we could conditionalize on bypass mode before
resolving the supply early here, but I'm not sure how well that would
work given how early in the regulator setup we are at this point.

Thierry

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)