linux-kernel - io-domain voltages as regulators?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 04 Aug 2014 00:18:40 +0200
From:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linus.walleij@...aro.org
Cc:	addy.ke@...k-chips.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: io-domain voltages as regulators?

Hi Mark, Linus,

I'd like to clarify what the appropriate way to handle pin output voltages is. 
On the Rockchip SoCs the voltage for some groups of pins can be set between 
3.3V and 1.8V ... like the MMC/SD pins who need this to support UHS mode 
cards.

In [0] when talking about something different, Linus Walleij described a 
similar case as

"I think we need to have a discussion with Mark Brown on how to
handle this.
We have previously had the case of MMC/SD level-shifters, where
a certain setting gives a certain level of signals out, and another setting
gives another level. Like two discrete levels.
So we modeled that as a regulator provider inside the pin control
driver eventually, see sh-pfc/pfc-sh73a0.c"

As this sound like exactly the thing I'm trying to solve, is handling this via 
a regulator the correct general way?

Thanks
Heiko

[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/28/147
--
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/