| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20121113131219.GA29198@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:12:19 +0000 From: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> Cc: sameo@...ux.intel.com, patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: arizona: Move chip reset to before register patch On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 02:56:20PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 05:56:48PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote: > > In the absence of a physical reset line the chip is reset by writing the > > first register, this was done after the register patch was applied which > > negates the settings applied in the register patch. > > > > This patch moves the reset to take place before the register patch is > > applied. > > No, we should never write to the chip until we have successfully > identified it. Do a sync or similar instead (we should be triggering > this very soon afterwards via runtime PM anyway). In that case I would be inclined to seperate out the chip identification and the register patch doing the reset in between. Is this something that would sound reasonable or would you rather just add a sync after the reset? -- 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