linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] PCI: brcmstb: Add control of subdevice voltage regulators

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 3 Nov 2021 16:34:34 -0400
From:   Jim Quinlan <james.quinlan@...adcom.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@...il.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        "moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] PCI: brcmstb: Add control of subdevice voltage regulators

On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 4:25 PM Jim Quinlan <james.quinlan@...adcom.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 3:45 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 02:49:35PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
> >
> > > +     for_each_property_of_node(dn, pp) {
> > > +             for (i = 0; i < ns; i++) {
> > > +                     char prop_name[64]; /* 64 is max size of property name */
> > > +
> > > +                     snprintf(prop_name, 64, "%s-supply", supplies[i]);
> > > +                     if (strcmp(prop_name, pp->name) == 0)
> > > +                             break;
> > > +             }
> > > +             if (i >= ns || pcie->num_supplies >= ARRAY_SIZE(supplies))
> > > +                     continue;
> > > +
> > > +             pcie->supplies[pcie->num_supplies++].supply = supplies[i];
> > > +     }
> >
> > Why are we doing this?  If the DT omits the supplies the framework will
> > provide dummy supplies so there is no need to open code handling for
> > supplies not being present at all in client drivers.  Just
> > unconditionally ask for all the supplies.
>
> I did it to squelch the "supply xxxxx not found, using dummy
> regulator" output.  I'll change it.
Now I remember: if I know there are no vpciexxx-supplly props in the
DT, I can skip executing all of the buik regulator calls entirely, as
well as walking the PCI bus as in brcm_regulators_off().

Do you consider this a valid reason?

Jim

Jim

Jim

> Regards, Jim