linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: sdhci: potentially bad behavior when using vmmc supply

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: <CAPDyKFq_6Ny9hYM_Vta=HqP2KQkyLc3RqZPP9D3Xvp58u0FksA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 9 Nov 2015 14:18:40 +0100
From:	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
	linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	pierre.samat@...el.com
Cc:	Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: sdhci: potentially bad behavior when using vmmc supply

On 9 November 2015 at 14:14, Ludovic Desroches
<ludovic.desroches@...el.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 11:50:50AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> >>
>> >> This doesn't seems like a case where a gpio regulator should be used
>> >> and I am not sure what problem it would solve. Beside to suppress the
>> >> log warnings (actually those aren't warnings but informations).
>> >>
>> >> Isn't sdhci_do_start_signal_voltage_switch() doing what you need here?
>> >>
>> >
>> > It is. I am only wondering the best way to describe the hardware:
>> > - No regulator but I have the 'no vqmmc regulator not found' message which
>> >   is a bit annoying and which can be interpreted as an issue for someone
>> >   who has no knowledge about this stuff.
>>
>> Hmm, should we turn them into debug messages? Both regulators are optional.
>>
>
> I think so. From my point of view, it is useless to indicate that
> something optionnal is missing.

Okay. Please go ahead and send a patch.

Kind regards
Uffe
--
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/