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: <20151204110018.GU26072@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 4 Dec 2015 11:00:18 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
Cc:	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, 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 Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 11:51:16PM +0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
> On 03/12/15 23:45, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Are you *sure* these are regulators and not power domains?  These names
> > look a lot like they could be power domains.

> No, I'm not sure. Some of them are may actually be regulators (the "PHY"
> ones) while others are almost definitely power domains (like the "FAP"
> Forwarding Assist Processor).

OK, so the power domains should be being represented and managed as such
rather than using regulators - it's a better fit (doing things like
support atomic context) and it also sidesteps this.  For the things that
you say are clearly regulators should we have more information about
those?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)