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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 20 Oct 2014 22:10:54 +0200
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Chris Zhong <zyw@...k-chips.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: EXYNOS: Call regulator core suspend prepare
 and finish functions

Hello Mark,

On 10/20/2014 09:56 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 09:50:57PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> On 10/20/2014 07:36 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> 
>> > I guess I was just trying to follow the suggestion that was in the
>> > regulator code:
>> > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/regulator/core.c#L3699
>> > that says "This will usually be called by machine suspend code prior
>> > to supending."
> 
>> I see, but still I feel as if it may be a lot of duplication since most
>> platforms will likely want to call the regulator core suspend prepare
> 
> Note that architectures are an example of a platform.  It really depends
> what's responsible for final poweroff, we want this called as late as we
> possibly can.
> 

Got it. Thanks for the explanation.

>> and finish functions. Maybe it can be added as a Kconfig option so each
>> platform can choose at the config level if they want those to be called?
> 
> No, that's obviously not going to do anything useful for multiplatform.
> 

Ok, then let's keep to do it per-platform as is proposed on $subject for
Exynos and what Chris proposed for Rockchip in [0] since it seems that's
the place where these calls belong.

Best regards,
Javier

[0]: http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg53640.html
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists