linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Add coupled regulators mechanism

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, 16 Mar 2018 10:21:21 -0700
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     Maciej Purski <m.purski@...sung.com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Add coupled regulators mechanism

* Maciej Purski <m.purski@...sung.com> [180312 12:24]:
> On 03/09/2018 04:58 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> [180309 12:43]:
> > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 01:22:02PM +0100, Maciej Purski wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I would like to kindly ask Fabio Estevam and Tony Lindgren to test the patch
> > > > series on their boards.
> > 
> > I gave it a quick try and this set still causes at least mmc0
> > to fail for me.
>
> Thanks. Here's a small patch, which adds some debugs. Maybe they will reveal,
> where the problem is.

Sorry for the delay, now back from ELC. I tried applying this on
top of Linux next + your six patches but it fails to apply. Do
I need something else too?

Regards,

Tony


> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index f1f11cf..0e80ba5 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -2280,7 +2280,6 @@ int regulator_enable(struct regulator *regulator)
>  {
>  	struct regulator_dev *rdev = regulator->rdev;
>  	int ret = 0;
> -	int ret2;
> 
>  	if (rdev->coupling_desc.n_resolved != rdev->coupling_desc.n_coupled) {
>  		rdev_err(rdev, "not all coupled regulators registered\n");
> @@ -2298,15 +2297,9 @@ int regulator_enable(struct regulator *regulator)
> 
>  	regulator_lock_dependent(rdev);
>  	ret = _regulator_enable(rdev);
> -	ret2 = regulator_balance_voltage(rdev, PM_SUSPEND_ON);
> +	regulator_balance_voltage(rdev, PM_SUSPEND_ON);
>  	regulator_unlock_dependent(rdev);
> 
> -	if (ret2 != 0) {
> -		rdev_err(rdev,
> -			"balancing failed when trying to enable regulator: %d",
> -			ret2);
> -	}
> -
>  	if (ret != 0 && rdev->supply)
>  		regulator_disable(rdev->supply);
> 
> @@ -3149,7 +3142,7 @@ static int regulator_set_voltage_rdev(struct regulator_dev *rdev, int min_uV,
>  		ret = regulator_set_voltage_unlocked(rdev->supply,
>  				best_supply_uV, INT_MAX, state);
>  		if (ret)
> -			dev_err(&rdev->dev, "Failed to decrease supply voltage: %d\n",
> +			dev_warn(&rdev->dev, "Failed to decrease supply voltage: %d\n",
>  					ret);
>  		/* No need to fail here */
>  		ret = 0;
> @@ -3332,11 +3325,8 @@ static int regulator_balance_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
>  		ret = regulator_set_voltage_rdev(best_rdev, best_uV,
>  						 best_uV, state);
> 
> -		if (ret < 0) {
> -			rdev_err(rdev,
> -				"Failed to set voltage with error: %d", ret);
> +		if (ret < 0)
>  			goto out;
> -		}
>  	}
> 
>  out:
> 
>