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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 20 Nov 2018 15:32:15 +0000
From:   Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
CC:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <patches@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Subject: Re: Applied "regulator: wm8994: Pass descriptor instead of GPIO
 number" to the regulator tree

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 03:58:59PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hi Charles,
> 
> On 2018-11-20 15:47, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 02:43:32PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >> On 2018-05-17 18:41, Mark Brown wrote:
> >>> Subject: [PATCH] regulator: wm8994: Pass descriptor instead of GPIO number
> >> This patch causes following kernel warning on Samsung Exynos4412 based
> >> Trats2 board:
> >>
> >> wm8994 4-001a: Failed to get supply 'DBVDD1': -517
> >> wm8994 4-001a: Failed to get supplies: -517
> > How is the wm8994 being registered on this board? I am having
> > difficulty finding a device tree or a board file that relates to
> > the board and includes the wm8994.
> 
> 
> Please check arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-trats2.dts details. The I2C device
> is defined in exynos4412-midas.dtsi, it uses "wlf,wm1811" compatible.
> 

Ok got it, thanks.

> 
> >>> @@ -203,6 +203,18 @@ static const struct i2c_board_info wm1277_devs[] = {
> >>>  	{ I2C_BOARD_INFO("wm8958", 0x1a),  /* WM8958 is the superset */
> >>>  	  .platform_data = &wm8994_pdata,
> >>>  	  .irq = GLENFARCLAS_PMIC_IRQ_BASE + WM831X_IRQ_GPIO_2,
> >>> +	  .dev_name = "wm8958",
> >>> +	},
> >>> +};
> >>> +
> >>> +static struct gpiod_lookup_table wm8994_gpiod_table = {
> >>> +	.dev_id = "i2c-wm8958", /* I2C device name */
> >>> +	.table = {
> >>> +		GPIO_LOOKUP("GPION", 6,
> >>> +			    "wlf,ldo1ena", GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH),
> >>> +		GPIO_LOOKUP("GPION", 4,
> >>> +			    "wlf,ldo2ena", GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH),
> >>> +		{ },
> >>>  	},
> >>>  };
> > If its being done through a board file I guess you will need the
> > equivalent of this.
> 
> 
> No board file, everything in DT.
> 

This is really weird, because the error in your log relates to
DBVDD1 which is an independent regulator supplied by a separate
regulator. I am really having some difficulty seeing how the
patch interfers. It is definitely that patch which causes the
issue, like you revert it and things work again?

Thanks,
Charles

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ