linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] add regulator driver and mfd cell for Intel Cherry Trail Whiskey Cove PMIC

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:   Fri, 25 Oct 2019 14:18:19 +0200
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrey Zhizhikin <andrey.z@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        lgirdwood@...il.com, lee.jones@...aro.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrey Zhizhikin <andrey.zhizhikin@...ca-geosystems.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] add regulator driver and mfd cell for Intel Cherry
 Trail Whiskey Cove PMIC

Hi,

On 25-10-2019 14:05, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:45:30PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> 
>> Hmm, I do just realize that the regulator subsystem turns off regulators
>> which are not in use from its pov, which would be kinda bad here.
> 
> It will only do this for regulators which have constraints which
> enable the kernel to change the power state of the regulator, the
> regulator core will never make any change to hardware that was
> not explicitly permitted by constraints so should be perfectly
> safe unless constraints are provided in which case it's up to
> whoever provides the constraints to make sure they are safe.

Ok, thank you for the explanation.

Then I believe it is fine to keep the driver as is, with support
for all regulators in the PMIC.

Regards,

Hans