linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 7/7] regulator: qcom-smd-rpm: Regulator driver for the Qualcomm RPM

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

Message-ID: <20141001181346.GI4273@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:13:46 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>
Cc:	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 7/7] regulator: qcom-smd-rpm: Regulator driver for the
 Qualcomm RPM

On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 05:34:51PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:

> According to the datasheet for the PMIC the regulators are indeed programmed in
> steps, but the steps seems to vary between different regulators and the details
> are hidden by the RPM that exposes contiguous voltage ranges.

> Either we run with this, add a few more compatibles to encode the steps or have
> the step coming from devicetree. I prefer the current implementation as that is
> the cleanest of these.

We have support for this sort of regulator in the core anyway so just
keep on doing what you're doing.

> +	if (vreg->desc.ops->set_voltage &&
> +	    (!initdata->constraints.min_uV || !initdata->constraints.max_uV)) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no voltage specified for regulator\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}

You shouldn't need to do this - it should be perfectly legal to have the
ability to set voltages but not use that ability.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)