linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V1 2/3] mmc: sdhci-msm: Use internal voltage control

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 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:   Mon, 18 May 2020 20:11:31 -0700
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Veerabhadrarao Badiganti <vbadigan@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     adrian.hunter@...el.com, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Vijay Viswanath <vviswana@...eaurora.org>,
        Asutosh Das <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 2/3] mmc: sdhci-msm: Use internal voltage control

On Mon 18 May 12:57 PDT 2020, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Fri 15 May 04:18 PDT 2020, Veerabhadrarao Badiganti wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
[..]
> > +static int sdhci_msm_register_vreg(struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host)
> > +{
> > +	int ret = 0;
> 
> No need to initialize ret, first use is an assignment.
> 
> > +	struct mmc_host *mmc = msm_host->mmc;
> > +
> > +	ret = mmc_regulator_get_supply(msm_host->mmc);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> > +	device_property_read_u32(&msm_host->pdev->dev,
> > +			"vmmc-max-load-microamp",
> > +			&msm_host->vmmc_load);
> > +	device_property_read_u32(&msm_host->pdev->dev,
> > +			"vqmmc-max-load-microamp",
> > +			&msm_host->vqmmc_load);
> 
> These properties are not documented. Do they vary enough to mandate
> being read from DT or could they simply be approximated by a define
> instead?
> 

Disregard my comment about them not being documented, I wasn't Cc'ed on
the binding patch and missed it.

My question about just defining them statically still stands.

Thanks,
Bjorn