| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 11:03:56 +0100
From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Provide dummy supply support
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:27:21PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:50:14PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 28 October 2011 18:47:57 Sascha Hauer wrote:
>
> > > > We already have a dummy regulator driver and a fixed voltage regulator
> > > > driver, we shouldn't be adding a third implementation of the same thing.
> > > > Just use the fixed voltage regulator for this.
>
> > > I explained in my mail why I think that the current implementation of
> > > the dummy regulator is not suitable for things apart from debugging.
>
> > your complaints seem to be specific to how the dummy regulator gets hooked in
> > and not in the specific regulator implementation. so it seems like the right
> > thing would be to split the kconfig knobs:
>
> Quite. Sascha, your mail doesn't refer to the implementation of the
> regulator itself at all. Nothing in your changelog even mentions that
> you're introducing a new regulator driver.
>
> I think there's a big abstraction understanding failure here, reading
> your changelog I'm not sure you understand the existing mechainsms that
> are in place. You say:
>
> | This patch allows a board to register dummy supplies for devices
> | which need a regulator but which is not software controllable
> | on this board.
>
> but this is exactly the use case the fixed voltage regulator is there
> for.
>
> > config REGULATOR_DUMMY
> > - bool "Provide a dummy regulator if regulator lookups fail"
> > + bool "Provide a dummy regulator"
> > +config REGULATOR_DUMMY_FALLBACK
> > + bool "Fallback to dummy regulator if lookup fails"
> > + depends on REGULATOR_DUMMY
>
> As I think I said earlier I'd use the fixed regulator for this, all
> Sascha's actually doing here is adding a wrapper to simplify
> registration of that.
There's one difference between the fixed and the dummy regulator though:
The fixed regulator has a voltage. The same dummy regulator instance can
be used for all devices which do not have a software controllable
regulator. I think the same can be done with the fixed regulator aswell,
but the bogus voltage showing up in the sysfs entry might be confusing
to users.
That's the reason I implemented a (second) dummy regulator driver.
Indeed it's not nice to have two of them.
Another approach to this topic would be to allow a board to explicitely
bind to the existing dummy regulator, like the following (error path
should of course be implemented before applying this)
Sascha
8<------------------------------------
[PATCH] regulator: allow boards to bind to the dummy regulator
Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
---
drivers/regulator/core.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/regulator/machine.h | 8 ++++++++
2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
index d8e6a42..a7a38ba 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
@@ -1046,6 +1046,25 @@ static void unset_regulator_supplies(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
}
}
+int regulator_add_dummy_supply(struct regulator_consumer_supply *supply,
+ int num_supplies)
+{
+ int i, ret;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < num_supplies; i++) {
+ ret = set_consumer_device_supply(dummy_regulator_rdev, NULL,
+ supply[i].dev_name, supply[i].supply);
+ if (ret)
+ goto err_out;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+err_out:
+ /* FIXME: unset device supply */
+ return ret;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(regulator_add_dummy_supply);
+
#define REG_STR_SIZE 64
static struct regulator *create_regulator(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
diff --git a/include/linux/regulator/machine.h b/include/linux/regulator/machine.h
index ce3127a..89089cd 100644
--- a/include/linux/regulator/machine.h
+++ b/include/linux/regulator/machine.h
@@ -192,6 +192,8 @@ int regulator_suspend_finish(void);
#ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
void regulator_has_full_constraints(void);
void regulator_use_dummy_regulator(void);
+int regulator_add_dummy_supply(struct regulator_consumer_supply *supply,
+ int num_supplies);
#else
static inline void regulator_has_full_constraints(void)
{
@@ -200,6 +202,12 @@ static inline void regulator_has_full_constraints(void)
static inline void regulator_use_dummy_regulator(void)
{
}
+
+static inline int regulator_add_dummy_supply(struct regulator_consumer_supply *supply,
+ int num_supplies)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
#endif
#endif
--
1.7.7
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists