linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 3/5] drm/bridge: Add PTN3460 bridge 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, 10 Oct 2013 20:40:38 +0900
From:	Inki Dae <inki.dae@...sung.com>
To:	'Mark Brown' <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	'Olof Johansson' <olof@...om.net>,
	'Sean Paul' <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	'DRI mailing list' <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/5] drm/bridge: Add PTN3460 bridge driver



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@...nel.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 6:37 PM
> To: Inki Dae
> Cc: 'Olof Johansson'; 'Sean Paul'; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org; linux-doc@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; 'DRI mailing list'; linux-arm-
> kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] drm/bridge: Add PTN3460 bridge driver
> 
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 01:18:05PM +0900, Inki Dae wrote:
> 
> > > > I still think the pin could be replaced with a regulator. But
> > > > lvds-bridge node has "powerdown-gpio" property - it say this board
> > > > will use gpio pin - specific to board.  So it seems no problem.
> 
> > > No, don't model things that aren't regulators as regulators - it's
> > > just confusing from a usability standpoint and causes breakage when
> > > the pins don't behave like regulators.
> 
> > It seems that there was your missing point. That _is not_ what I
> mentioned.
> > I mean that other boards can use a regulator instead of gpio pin.
> 
> What I'm saying is no boards should use a regulator to control that GPIO
> pin, obviously if they're controlling the actual regulators that's fine

That is what I mentioned. Some boards _could control_ the actual regulator
for lvds-bridge, and that would be depended on how HW engineer designs the
board. 

> but the reset signal should not be controlled via the regulator API (there
> are some unfortunate cases where people have done that already but let's
> not have any more).

--
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/