linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] cpufreq: imx6q: Set max suspend

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]

Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2017 11:16:23 +0300
From:   Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
CC:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Robin Gong <yibin.gong@....com>,
        Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com>,
        Irina Tirdea <irina.tirdea@....com>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
        Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@....com>,
        "Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@...il.com>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] cpufreq: imx6q: Set max suspend_freq to avoid
 changes during suspend

On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 12:07 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 04-04-17, 20:04, Leonard Crestez wrote:
> > If the cpufreq driver tries to modify voltage/freq during suspend/resume
> > it might need to control an external PMIC via I2C or SPI but those
> > devices might be already suspended. This issue is likely to happen
> > whenever the LDOs have their vin-supply set.
> > 
> > To avoid this scenario we just increase cpufreq to the maximum before
> > suspend.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c | 8 +++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

> I have already Acked this earlier, why didn't you add it ?

Because v2 is different based on comments from Lucas. It didn't seem
appropriate to keep an old "Acked-by" in this case.