linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/4] Introduce usb charger framework to deal with the usb gadget power negotation

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: <20160315163918.GQ2566@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Tue, 15 Mar 2016 16:39:18 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>
Cc:	balbi@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, sre@...nel.org,
	dbaryshkov@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	peter.chen@...escale.com, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
	r.baldyga@...sung.com, yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com,
	lee.jones@...aro.org, ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	device-mainlining@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/4] Introduce usb charger framework to deal with the
 usb gadget power negotation

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:22:12PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 11:04:26AM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:

I see Felipe is no longer at TI so his e-mail was bouncing - let's
resend this with his kernel.org address:

> > Currently the Linux kernel does not provide any standard integration of this
> > feature that integrates the USB subsystem with the system power regulation
> > provided by PMICs meaning that either vendors must add this in their kernels
> > or USB gadget devices based on Linux (such as mobile phones) may not behave
> > as they should. Thus provide a standard framework for doing this in kernel.

> So, the review of this seems to have ground to a bit of a halt - we're
> really not seeing any engagement or comments here, people aren't raising
> any problems or suggesting alternative approaches but this isn't moving
> forwards either.  This means that nothing running mainline that isn't
> totally offloaded to hardware can charge at even 500mA, let alone more,
> which seems like a failure to me.  What do we need to move this
> forwards?

> If there are concerns around ABI we could either make sure it's as basic
> as possible (so that it'll be easy to maintain compatibility if we think
> of something better) or just hide things from userspace so that we just
> have the in kernel implementation.



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