linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] mmc: core: Use regulator_get

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: <20140815085919.GG17528@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 15 Aug 2014 09:59:19 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Tim Kryger <tim.kryger@...il.com>
Cc:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
	Chris Ball <chris@...ntf.net>,
	Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@...sung.com>,
	Haijun Zhang <Haijun.Zhang@...escale.com>,
	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Yuvaraj Kumar C D <yuvaraj.cd@...il.com>,
	linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mmc: core: Use regulator_get_voltage() if OCR mask
 is empty.

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:36:18PM -0700, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > Right, there's two things going on here.  One is that as you describe we
> > shouldn't be putting constraints in .dtsi files if we don't know they're
> > OK for a given board.  The other thing is that on this particular board
> > it turns out that there's no support for varying the voltages at all so
> > it doesn't make sense to have to specify a range, there's only one value
> > anyway so the software really should be able to figure out that fixed
> > value all by itself.

> If constraints are truly irrelevant when the voltage supplied to
> consumers is fixed, why doesn't regulator_list_voltage honor this
> exemption and skip the voltage filtering that uses (potentially
> unspecified) constraints when output is entirely determined by a
> parent (or grandparent) supply that can't change its voltage?

> It seems odd to make callers be the ones to handle this subtlety.

regulator_list_voltage() tells the consumer what voltages could be set,
regulator_get_voltage() tells the consumer what the voltage currently
is.  These aren't quite the same thing.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)