linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] Support ROHM BD9576MUF and BD9573MUF PMICs

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:   Tue, 9 Feb 2021 14:19:30 +0000
From:   "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
To:     "Mazziesaccount@...il.com" <Mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
        "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
CC:     linux-power <linux-power@...rohmeurope.com>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "geert+renesas@...der.be" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        "linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com" <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] Support ROHM BD9576MUF and BD9573MUF PMICs

Hello Lee, Mark All,

On Fri, 2021-01-22 at 16:30 +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> Initial support for ROHM BD9576MUF and BD9573MUF PMICs.
> 
> These PMICs are primarily intended to be used to power the R-Car
> family
> processors. BD9576MUF includes some additional safety features the
> BD9573MUF does not have. This initial version of drivers provides
> temperature, over voltage and under voltage warnings is IRQ
> information
> is passed via DT.
> 
> This patch series includes MFD and watchdog drivers. Regulator part
> was
> already applied but this series brings the over-/undervoltage and
> temperature error notifications which consumer drivers can utilize.

I had some discussion with Mark and Angelo about creating a helper for
handling this kind of regulator notification IRQs.
(For anyone interested: the discussion can be seen here:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6046836e22b8252983f08d5621c35ececb97820d.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com/
)

I've now drafted RFCv1 for that support (not sent it yet). The RFC
converts the BD9576 regulator driver to use the new helper and adds
some new definitions to MFD headers.

What would be the most convenient way of handling this? Should I merge
this series in the RFC and make it just one big series? Or should I
keep these as two separated series? If I keep these as separate series,
should I then omit all the MFD patches from RFC series - and add
potential MFD changes (like OVD/UVD configuration registers) in this
series (which makes bd9576 regulators not compiling) - or should the
MFD parts be included in both series - in which case we need to somehow
stay on track what parts of MFD is reviewed.

Simplest for me would be if we could get the oldest patches 1,2,4 and 5
from this series in-tree (only MFD is not acked) - but I guess it won't
happen at this point of the development cycle - and bring in the IRQ
(patch 3) and regulator notifications (patch 6) using the RFC series.

How do you see it? Should I meld this in the RFC or keep two separate
series - in which case, how should I handle the MFD changes brought by
the RFC series?

Best Regards
	Matti Vaittinen