linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mfd: tps65218.c: Add input voltage options

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]

Message-ID: <20190117080743.GI23399@dell>
Date:   Thu, 17 Jan 2019 08:07:43 +0000
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Christian Hohnstaedt <Christian.Hohnstaedt@...o.com>
Cc:     Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mfd: tps65218.c: Add input voltage options

On Thu, 17 Jan 2019, Christian Hohnstaedt wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 02:13:36PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Jan 2019, Christian Hohnstaedt wrote:
> > 
> > > These options apply to all regulators in this chip.
> > > 
> > > ti,strict-supply-voltage-supervision:
> > >   Set STRICT flag in CONFIG1
> > > ti,under-voltage-limit-microvolt:
> > >   Select 2.75, 2.95, 3.25 or 3.35 V UVLO in CONFIG1
> > > ti,under-voltage-hyst-microvolt:
> > >   Select 200mV or 400mV UVLOHYS in CONFIG2
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Christian Hohnstaedt <Christian.Hohnstaedt@...o.com>
> > > Tested-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mfd/tps65218.c       | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  include/linux/mfd/tps65218.h |  4 ++
> > >  2 files changed, 93 insertions(+)
> > 
> > This looks like regulator code.
> > 
> > Why aren't you placing it into the regulator driver?
> 
> This code manages properties of the chip, affecting all regulators.
> 
> The regulator-driver has no hook to be called once for the chip.
> Even if I put this code into the regulator driver file,
> I will have to call it from here.
> 
> This would introduce a dependency from the mfd to the regulator code.

Sounds reasonable.  Thanks for the explanation.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog