linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mfd: Add anatop mfd driver

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, 01 Mar 2012 17:19:47 +0800
From:	"Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu)" <paul.liu@...aro.org>
To:	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mfd: Add anatop mfd driver

(2012年02月21日 19:17), Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I didn't get patch #2, so I don't get to see how the read/write functions ar
> eused for example.
> 

Hi Samuel,

Sorry for late reply.
I've sent out v5 today.

>> +	ioreg = ioremap(ofaddr, ofsize);
>> +	if (!ioreg)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	drvdata = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(struct anatop), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!drvdata)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	drvdata->ioreg = ioreg;
>> +	drvdata->read = anatop_read;
>> +	drvdata->write = anatop_write;
>> +	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, drvdata);
>> +	of_platform_bus_probe(np, of_anatop_regulator_match, dev);
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
> So it seems that your driver here does nothing but extending your device tree
> definition. Correct me if I'm wrong, aren't you trying to fix a broken device
> tree definition here ?
> 

The driver here ioremap the addresses for anatop chip in i.MX6Q SoC. The
addresses are shared by several regulators. Also thermal drivers are
also in the same range.

Here are examples of the anatop description in dts file

   anatop@...c8000 {
           compatible = "fsl,imx6q-anatop";
           reg = <0x020c8000 0x1000>;
           interrupts = <0 49 0x04 0 54 0x04 0 127 0x04>;
           #address-cells = <1>;
           #size-cells = <1>;
           reg_vddpu: regulator-vddpu@140 {
                   compatible = "fsl,anatop-regulator";
                   regulator-name = "vddpu";
                   regulator-min-microvolt = <725000>;
                   regulator-max-microvolt = <1300000>;
                   regulator-always-on;
                   reg = <0x140 1>;
                   vol-bit-shift = <9>;
                   vol-bit-size = <5>;
                   min-bit-val = <1>;
                   min-voltage = <725000>;
                   max-voltage = <1300000>;
           };
           reg_vddcore: regulator-vddcore@140 {
                   compatible = "fsl,anatop-regulator";
                   regulator-name = "vddcore";
                   regulator-min-microvolt = <725000>;
                   regulator-max-microvolt = <1300000>;
                   regulator-always-on;
                   reg = <0x140 1>;
                   vol-bit-shift = <0>;
                   vol-bit-size = <5>;
                   min-bit-val = <1>;
                   min-voltage = <725000>;
                   max-voltage = <1300000>;
           };
           ...

So both reg_vddpu and reg_vddcore are using the same address.

Yours Sincerely,
Paul
--
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/