linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: rockchip: remove excess sd properties for firefly reload

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: <af99cf05-dfc7-1ae6-8d23-f33298b5f683@soulik.info>
Date:	Sun, 14 Aug 2016 20:38:59 +0800
From:	ayaka <ayaka@...lik.info>
To:	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
	mark.rutland@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: rockchip: remove excess sd properties for
 firefly reload



On 08/14/2016 08:30 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 14. August 2016, 19:27:23 CEST schrieb Randy Li:
>> Because of a bug in hardware design, the sdcard at firefly
>> rk3288 reload board can't switch the io voltage level to 1.8v.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Randy Li <ayaka@...lik.info>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-firefly-reload.dts | 7 +------
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-firefly-reload.dts
>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-firefly-reload.dts index 43145d1..a2b1f14 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-firefly-reload.dts
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3288-firefly-reload.dts
>> @@ -202,18 +202,13 @@
>>   	bus-width = <4>;
>>   	cap-mmc-highspeed;
>>   	cap-sd-highspeed;
>> -	sd-uhs-sdr12;
>> -	sd-uhs-sdr25;
>> -	sd-uhs-sdr50;
>> -	sd-uhs-sdr104;
>> -	sd-uhs-ddr50;
>>   	card-detect-delay = <200>;
>>   	disable-wp;
>>   	num-slots = <1>;
>>   	pinctrl-names = "default";
>>   	pinctrl-0 = <&sdmmc_clk>, <&sdmmc_cmd>, <&sdmmc_cd>, <&sdmmc_bus4>;
>>   	vmmc-supply = <&vcc_sd>;
>> -	vqmmc-supply = <&vccio_sd>;
>> +	vqmmc-supply = <&vcc_sd>;
> that looks wrong. vccio_sd is still the vqmmc supply in the schematics even
> though we don't want to switch to 1.8V . But that regulator should still be
I think the vccio_sd is just the one connected to the io_domains, but 
the voltage source for the
pull up register is not vccio_sd but vcc_io.
> controllable without needing a regulator-always-on in the future.
>
>
> Heiko