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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 16:11:30 +0000 From: "Opensource [Anthony Olech]" <anthony.olech.opensource@...semi.com> To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, "Opensource [Anthony Olech]" <anthony.olech.opensource@...semi.com> CC: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "David Dajun Chen" <david.chen@...semi.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH V1] fix da9052 volatile register definition ommissions > -----Original Message----- > From: Lee Jones [mailto:lee.jones@...aro.org] > Sent: 03 February 2014 10:29 > To: Opensource [Anthony Olech] > Cc: Mark Brown; Samuel Ortiz; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; David Dajun > Chen > Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] fix da9052 volatile register definition ommissions > > Three of the PMIC registers have some bits that are changed > > autonomously by the PMIC itself (some time) after being set by some > > component driver of the DA9052 PMIC and hence they need to be marked > > as volatile so that the regmap API will not cache their values. > > Signed-off-by: Anthony Olech <anthony.olech.opensource@...semi.com> > > Signed-off-by: David Dajun Chen <david.chen@...semi.com> > These are not correct. > Who authored the patch? Hi Lee, I found the problem when running regression tests for another different problem. And according to my testing on a SMDK6410+DA9053EVB the patch is correct!! Tony Olech > > --- > > This patch is relative to linux-next repository tag next-20140128 > > The bug that this patch fixes affects two components of DA9052 namely: > > WATCHDOG - the first kick will work but sebsequent ones will not > > thus the will timeout at 2 x interval. > > REGULATORS - the first change to any DA9052 BUCK voltage will be > > actioned, but sebsequent ones will not. > Which patch caused the bug? I will find out when I start rebasing backwards to submit patches to linux-stable! > > drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c b/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c > > index 25838f1..e8af816 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c > > @@ -279,6 +279,9 @@ static bool da9052_reg_volatile(struct device *dev, > unsigned int reg) > > case DA9052_EVENT_B_REG: > > case DA9052_EVENT_C_REG: > > case DA9052_EVENT_D_REG: > > + case DA9052_CONTROL_B_REG: > > + case DA9052_CONTROL_D_REG: > > + case DA9052_SUPPLY_REG: > > case DA9052_FAULTLOG_REG: > > case DA9052_CHG_TIME_REG: > > case DA9052_ADC_RES_L_REG: > > -- > Lee Jones > Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source > software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists