linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: sgtl5000: only check VDDD-supply, not revision

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:	Fri, 3 Jun 2016 18:23:18 +0200
From:	Eric Nelson <eric@...int.com>
To:	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
	Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com>
Cc:	"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: sgtl5000: only check VDDD-supply, not revision

Hi Fabio,

On 06/02/2016 05:48 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Clemens,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Clemens Gruber
> <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com> wrote:
>> Instead of checking the SGTL5000 chip revision, we should only check if
>> the VDDD regulator exists and only call sgtl5000_replace_vddd_with_ldo
>> if the regulator is missing.
>> Otherwise, the user reads in the kernel log that the internal LDO is
>> used, even though he did follow the NXP recommendation to use external
>> VDDD and also specified VDDD-supply in the devicetree.
>>
>> Also remove the comment, which incorrectly states that external VDDD is
>> only supported for SGTL5000 chip revisions < 0x11.
>> Official NXP documentation recommends using external VDDD and not the
>> internal LDO due to the SGTL5000 erratum ER1. This also applies to
>> revisions >= 0x11.
>>
>> Tested on an i.MX6Q board with SGTL5000 rev 0x11 and external VDDD.
> 
> Patch looks good to me.
> 
> Eric,
> 
> Sometime ago you were looking at this. What do you think about this patch?
> 

Sorry. I'm traveling and haven't had a chance to review this, but it's
on my to-do.