linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Add ltc3562 voltage regulator driver

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: <545218B1.8030306@topic.nl>
Date:	Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:53:37 +0100
From:	Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	<lgirdwood@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add ltc3562 voltage regulator driver

On 10/30/2014 11:29 AM, Mike Looijmans wrote:
> On 10/30/2014 11:15 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 07:47:44AM +0100, Mike Looijmans wrote:
>>> On 10/29/2014 01:30 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>>> A couple of problems here:
>>
>>>>   - This contains DT code but no DT bindings documentation; the binding
>>>>     documentation is mandatory for any new bindings.
>>
>>> Should I submit a new patch to add the DT bindings and CC to the dt mailing
>>> list, or do you want it included in this patch? I was basically waiting for
>>> feedback on the driver first.
>>
>> I'm not going to review a driver with bindings without those bindings
>> being documented, it's a well documented requirement and apart from
>> anything else it's not really possible to review the code that manages
>> the bindings without seeing the bindings.
>>
>>> The "default voltage" may not be device specific, but regulator.txt doesn't
>>> have a property that describes what we needed here, because we can't get
>>> away with specifying min=max as fixed-regulator does. We also cannot assume
>>> that default=min or default=max, because that might harm hardware connected
>>> to the other side of the IO bank.
>>
>> No, if you need a generic property add it in the generic code rather
>> than just hacking a device specific property into your driver.
>
> So I should add "regulator-default-voltage" to the generic code? That would
> indeed be better than trying to do it into this driver.
>
> But would that need a separate patch for regulator core to add the property?

Hmm, I looked into doing that, but that isn't trivial, and too many devices 
will suffer.

Since default-voltage is unacceptable, I will remove it from the ltc3562 
driver and just use the min==max setting in the devicetree to reach the same 
effect. The driver that will match IO voltages between SOM and carrier is far 
from being ready for submission anyway.

I'll submit a v2 patch with all these things reworked soon.

Mike.


Met vriendelijke groet / kind regards,

Mike Looijmans
System Expert


TOPIC Embedded Systems
Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: (+31) (0) 499 33 69 79
Telefax:  (+31) (0) 499 33 69 70
E-mail: mike.looijmans@...ic.nl
Website: www.topic.nl

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Topic zoekt gedreven (embedded) software specialisten!
http://topic.nl/vacatures/topic-zoekt-software-engineers/

--
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/