linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core.c Pass voltage to notifier when setting voltage

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CADTbHxq1xY2bg2VWVhoYxB2Gjhz6PhGLjV3FPV0wjXUVnuo9-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 16 Jun 2012 00:07:22 +0530
From:	Pankaj Jangra <jangra.pankaj9@...il.com>
To:	Philip Rakity <prakity@...vell.com>
Cc:	Philip Rakity <philipspatches@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com" 
	<broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core.c Pass voltage to notifier when
 setting voltage

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Philip Rakity <prakity@...vell.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Pankaj Jangra wrote:
>
>> Hi Philip,
>>
>> Just a cosmetic comments.
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Philip Rakity <philipspatches@...il.com> wrote:
>> V2
>> --
>>
>> Incorporate performance suggestions made by Mark Brown
>> Use linux-next as base code rather than mmc-next
>>
>> The voltage being set should be passed to the handler requesting
>> the callback.  Currently this is not done.
>
> thanks -- my typo when redoing the patch -- V3 has this fixed.
>
>>
>> The callback cannot call regulator_get_voltage() to get the
>> information since the mutex is held by the regulator and
>> deadlock occurs.
>>
>> Without this change the receiver of the notify cannot now what
>>
>> You mean to say "cannot know what" ?
>>
>> action to take.  This is used, for example, to set PAD voltages
>> when doing SD vccq voltage changes.
>
>
> if you call in that receives the notify does not know the new voltage
> then in our case we do not know if we should switch the pad from
> 3.3v to 1.8v for example.  vccq signaling in SD is normally 3.3V
> but in UHS mode it is lowered to 1.8V
>

Yes right. So that means we need to make change in
blocking_notifier_call_chain() too in order to send the voltage back?

Regards,
Pankaj Jangra
--
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/