linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] sun8i: r40: add AHCI

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: <3F7BD4FD-D8D8-4900-BC53-E2C1928616A4@aosc.io>
Date:   Tue, 10 Jul 2018 20:32:27 +0800
From:   Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
        Corentin Labbe <clabbe@...libre.com>
CC:     linux@...linux.org.uk, mark.rutland@....com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        tj@...nel.org, wens@...e.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] sun8i: r40: add AHCI



于 2018年7月10日 GMT+08:00 下午8:29:22, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com> 写到:
>On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:20:54PM +0000, Corentin Labbe wrote:
>> Hello
>> 
>> With Moeicenowy's agreement, I have take leadership ot this patchset.
>> 
>> There are no really changes appart renaming struct quirck to variant.
>> 
>> Since the last serie is really old, I will answer comment here.
>> The two regulator (1.2 and 2.5V) are not for the PHY since:
>> - nothing in the schematic said that they are for the PHY, they seems
>>   only for controller
>> - all other AHCI driver use 5V for the target/PHY (vs 1.2/2.5 which
>>   cannot be used for target)
>
>That's a pretty bad thing to do, especially for old series. You just
>dropped all the context that you reply to, and there's no way for any
>reviewer to tell if your answers make any kind of sense, or addresses
>any question one might have had.
>
>> Furthermore, the AHCI binding support only one regulator per PHY, so
>> using the "target" regulator is out of question for registring this
>two
>> non-phy regulator.
>
>Nothing is "out of question", we have the source code and can change
>it if needed.

The main problem is that he misunderstood the meaning
of target regulator -- it's not for PHY but for disk. And if a
device is designed to accept both 2.5" and 3.5" HDD at
the same port multiple target regulator might really
be useful -- one 5v and one 12v.

>
>Maxime