linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 11/13] dt-bindings: regulator: add DVFSRC regulator dt-bindings

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: <1585545553.32635.10.camel@mtksdaap41>
Date:   Mon, 30 Mar 2020 13:19:13 +0800
From:   Henry Chen <henryc.chen@...iatek.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        "Viresh Kumar" <vireshk@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Ryan Case <ryandcase@...omium.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "Nicolas Boichat" <drinkcat@...gle.com>,
        Fan Chen <fan.chen@...iatek.com>,
        James Liao <jamesjj.liao@...iatek.com>,
        Arvin Wang <arvin.wang@...iatek.com>,
        "Mike Turquette" <mturquette@...aro.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 11/13] dt-bindings: regulator: add DVFSRC regulator
 dt-bindings

Hi Mark,
On Tue, 2020-03-24 at 20:38 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 05:34:24PM +0800, Henry Chen wrote:
> 
> > +- regulator : The DVFSRC regulator is modelled as a subdevice of the DVFSRC.
> > +	Because DVFSRC can request power directly via register read/write, likes
> > +	vcore which is a core power of mt8183. As such, the DVFSRC regulator
> > +	requires that DVFSRC nodes be present. shall contain only one of the
> > +	following: "mediatek,mt8183-dvfsrc-regulator"
> 
> Why do we even need a compatible here - it's not adding any new
> information to the parent mt8183 node, the compatible is mainly for the
> way Linux divides things up rather than a description of the hardware.
> We could just say that the regulator node always has a particular name
> instead.
Sorry, not quite sure what you mean, because I think DVFSRC is a
regulator provider that can provide vcore voltage control on mt8183, and
it can provide more power control in the next generation Mediatek SOC.
Here I add a sub-node to describe it. Or should I move this node to
regulator folder? 

> 
> It's also not quite true that it contains "only" the compatible - it
> also allows the regulator constraints to be defined.