linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mmc: dw_mmc: Handle late vmmc regulators with EPROBE

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]

Message-ID: <CAD=FV=WOWk==gjnuEwZfywU2Wxccj7AbSVNj_zuF0bnn8uDf4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 7 Jun 2013 11:14:44 -0700
From:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>
Cc:	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@...omium.org>,
	Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
	Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan@...sung.com>,
	Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
	Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@...sung.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com>,
	"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org" 
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mmc: dw_mmc: Handle late vmmc regulators with EPROBE_DEFER

Tomasz,

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com> wrote:
> A question just out of curiousity: Is it really correct to have one vmmc
> regulator for the whole device, instead of one regulator per slot?
>
> This might be something obvious, but I don't know any details about
> dw_mmc, so sorry if it's the case.

I don't actually know.  I've never seen a multi-slot implementation so
I end up doing lots of speculation when I make changes.  Certainly the
code I'm moving wouldn't have worked correctly in the
more-than-one-slot case.  There's only space to pass one regulator
(it's not per-slot) and that one regulator would have just been
enabled multiple times.  ...and it would have only been disabled once
in places like suspend/resume.

If there is every a multi-slot implementation that needs vmmc on a
per-slot it seems like we could address at that time?

Thanks!

-Doug
--
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/