linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: Add brcm,bcm63xx-regulator device tree binding

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: <565F53FC.5080309@simon.arlott.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 2 Dec 2015 20:26:36 +0000
From:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: Add brcm,bcm63xx-regulator device tree
 binding

On 02/12/15 12:53, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 12:45:50PM -0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
>> On Tue, December 1, 2015 22:16, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>> > Why are these in the DT, I would expect that if this is a driver for a
>> > specific SoC all these properties would be known as a result of that.
> 
>> This is a driver for multiple SoCs with the same regulator control in
>> different places on different SoCs, so the location of it within the misc
>> register needs to be provided in the DT:
> 
>> BCM6362:
>>   #define MISC_BASE 0xb0001800 /* Miscellaneous Registers */
>>   uint32 miscIddqCtrl; /* 0x48 */
> 
> This is the sort of thing you can pick up from the SoC compatible
> strings.  As things stand there is zero content in this driver that
> relates to this SoC.

There's always going to be very little content in the driver that
relates to this SoC, given that a single bit flip enables/disables
power.

All other device tree drivers allow a register address to be specified
for the device, how is an offset in the regmap any different?

>> The mask is used as there's one bit per regulator in the register, but
>> there's more than one way to express this in the DT:
> 
> I wouldn't expect to see it in the device tree at all for a device
> specific driver.

If there isn't an individual entry in DT for each regulator, how is it
supposed to work? There's no #regulator-cells property.

-- 
Simon Arlott
--
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/