linux-kernel - [Question] should we export set_suspend

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

Message-ID: <7d3ec992.e522.14b5cd26cf6.Coremail.yizhanghust@163.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Feb 2015 10:57:49 +0800 (CST)
From:	"Yi Zhang" <yizhanghust@....com>
To:	broonie@...nel.org, lgirdwood@...il.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yizhang@...vell.com,
	zhenzh@...vell.com, zhouqiao@...vell.com
Subject: [Question] should we export set_suspend_voltage()?


Hi, Liam & Mark:


seems at present, the set_suspend_voltage() is designed to cover the suspend voltage handling from board level, when the system enters into the suspend;
but the behavior of my chip is as following:
a) there are two sets of registers to configure one regulator's voltage separately, one is for active mode, the other is for the low power mode, say, suspend-to-ram;
b) both of the sets have control bits independently;
c) once the low power mode is triggered, by external signal, for example, pull-down a gpio, the regulator switches to use the registers for low power mode;
d) the consumers have different requirements for the voltage in low power mode according to different scenario, IOW, we cannot assume a fix value when system boots up;

So 
do you think it's good to export the set_suspend_voltage()? to make it controllable by the regulator itself?
another method in my opinion is add a set of virtual-regulator for this usage?

could you please share your advice?

thanks very much;

--
Yi Zhang