| 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: <A874F61F95741C4A9BA573A70FE3998F69E12A0D@DQHE02.ent.ti.com> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:35:03 +0000 From: "Kim, Milo" <Milo.Kim@...com> To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> CC: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>, "Girdwood, Liam" <lrg@...com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/3] regulator-core: update all enable GPIO state in _enable/disable > From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com] > > This isn't quite going to work properly - we need to actually move the > state (and also a reference count) into some sort of shared state. > Otherwise consider what happens in this scenario: > > 1. regulator 1 enables > 2. regulator 2 enables > 3. regulator 1 disables > > Since regulator 1 doesn't know anything about regulator 2 it'll not > know > that regulator 2 should still be enabled so it'll put the GPIO into the > disabled state. It'll be OK if regulator 1 and regulator 2 always have > the same state but if they ever differ then we'll not do the right > thing. Thanks for your opinion. My understanding is 'shared' enable pin means regulators are enabled/disabled at the same time. Any other case is possible? Best Regards, Milo -- 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