linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] regulator: sm5703-regulator: Add regulators support for SM5703 MFD

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]

Message-ID: <37fb7d5b-dbaa-0b8c-2ed6-6f1a462d7a62@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Apr 2022 21:02:49 +0300
From:   Markuss Broks <markuss.broks@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] regulator: sm5703-regulator: Add regulators support
 for SM5703 MFD

Hi Mark,

On 4/14/22 20:51, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 08:06:15PM +0300, Markuss Broks wrote:
>
>> +++ b/drivers/regulator/Makefile
>> @@ -173,5 +173,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_WM831X) += wm831x-ldo.o
>>   obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_WM8350) += wm8350-regulator.o
>>   obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_WM8400) += wm8400-regulator.o
>>   obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_WM8994) += wm8994-regulator.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_REGULATOR_SM5703) += sm5703-regulator.o
>>   
> Please keep the Kconfig and Makefile sorted.
>
>> +static const int sm5703_buck_voltagemap[] = {
>> +	1000000, 1000000, 1000000, 1000000,
>> +	1000000, 1000000, 1000000, 1000000,
>> +	1000000, 1000000, 1000000, 1100000,
>> +	1200000, 1300000, 1400000, 1500000,
>> +	1600000, 1700000, 1800000, 1900000,
>> +	2000000, 2100000, 2200000, 2300000,
>> +	2400000, 2500000, 2600000, 2700000,
>> +	2800000, 2900000, 3000000, 3000000,
>> +};
> Are the repeated values at the ends of the array actually valid or do
> they indicate the part being driven out of spec?  If it's out of spec
> then it's better to exclude them since otherwise we might choose one of
> those values when configuring a voltage which may not actually work as
> desired.

I am pretty sure those values are valid. This voltage map is taken 
directly from the downstream driver (I wish I had actual 
documentation...) , which also backs it by saying 32 voltage levels are 
supported. However, I find it rather improper to have separate values 
which result in same voltage level. Still, I'm not sure something like 
selector offset exists in struct regulator_desc or elsewhere.

- Markuss