linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] regulator: max77686: Add suspend disable for some LDOs

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]

Date:	Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:18:54 +0100
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] regulator: max77686: Add suspend disable for some
 LDOs

On śro, 2014-10-29 at 10:01 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:20:13AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On wto, 2014-10-28 at 22:31 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > This looks wrong, you're using the regular enable operation as suspend
> > > enable.  How does that work without disrupting the current runtime
> > > state?
> 
> > Currently it shouldn't disrupt state of regulator because during runtime
> > it may only be only: on (0x3) or off (0x0). Suspend enable in max77686
> > writes 0x3 to the register which means - always on.
> 
> > If regulator was disabled before suspend then it has to be enabled
> > during suspend_enable() call which is exactly what max77686_enable does.
> > If it was enabled then nothing happens.
> 
> No, this isn't suspend enable control - this is normal, standard enable
> control and the device has no suspend enable control.

You mean that for such regulator the driver shouldn't implement
suspend_enable()?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

--
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/