linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Regulator state after 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:40:21 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ia.com>
Cc:	kalle.jokiniemi@...ia.com, lrg@...mlogic.co.uk,
	mchehab@...radead.org, svarbatov@...sol.com, saaguirre@...com,
	grosikopulos@...sol.com, vimarsh.zutshi@...ia.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
	laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Regulator state after regulator_get

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 01:27:46PM +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Mark Brown wrote:

> > I'm not sure what "supply_nasty" would mean?  This also doesn't seem
> > like something that we can set up per supply - it's going to affect the
> > whole regulator state, it's not something that only affects a single
> > supply.

> supply_nasty() would be used to define a regulator which is enabled by
> the boot loader when it shouldn't be, which is the actual problem.

That's *really* not a clear name.

> How should this regulator be turned off in the boot by the kernel?

Have you read my previous mail where I described the existing support
for doing this when we have a full set of information on the regualtors
in the systems?
--
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/