linux-kernel - Re: regulator: mpq7920: Some inconsistencies in current driver

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <673bbb3e-70e1-db4e-239e-3fedbbfdd5ad@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Jan 2020 18:44:57 +0100
From:   saravanan sekar <sravanhome@...il.com>
To:     Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: regulator: mpq7920: Some inconsistencies in current driver


On 14/01/20 1:49 pm, Axel Lin wrote:
> Hi Saravanan,
>
> There are a few inconsistencies in current driver:
> I don't have the datasheet, so I'm not 100% sure.
> Maybe you can help check it.
>
> 1. It's unlikely MPQ7920_LDO1_REG_B and MPQ7920_REG_CTL0 have the same address.
>     I think this needs double check.

There is no REG_B register for MPQ7920_LDO1, it is a tweak for MACRO expansion consistence of MPQ7920LDO.
However LDO1 doesn't not access this register since mpq7920_ldortc_ops discharge api is set to NULL

> 2. The MPQ7920_DISCHARGE_ON seems wrong because it does not match
> MPQ7920_MASK_DISCHARGE.
>     I guess MPQ7920_DISCHARGE_ON should be BIT(5).
Yes, you are correct and thanks for pointing out
>
> 3. The MPQ7920_MASK_BUCK_ILIM seems wrong. I guess it should be 0xC0.

Yes, you are correct and thanks for pointing out

> 4. Not sure why define both MPQ7920_REG_REGULATOR_EN1 and
> MPQ7920_REG_REGULATOR_EN.
There is EN1 register exist but later decided that cannot be handled by 
driver so its stray which
shall be removed.
>
> Regards,
> Axel

Thanks,
Saravanan