linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: rpmh: Set wake/sleep state for BCM clks

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:   Thu, 12 May 2022 10:15:31 -0500
From:   Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
To:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        patches@...ts.linux.dev, Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: rpmh: Set wake/sleep state for BCM clks

On 5/11/22 5:04 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Will you take this in fixes, or do you want me to pick it for 5.19?
>>>
>> I'm waiting for Taniya to reply. For all I know this has no effect
>> because there's some sort of copy/paste from one state to another. Until
>> then it doesn't seem like we should do anything.
> Taniya told me that if there's no sleep or wake state set then active
> state remains even when the subsystem is in sleep. Not exactly
> copy/paste but at least it is consistent. We need a comment here so this
> doesn't come up again.

If I understand what you're saying here, your original patch is not
necessary, but there should be a comment in the code that explains
why that is the case.  Is that right?  And am I right to assume you
will be sending out a patch with such a comment?

					-Alex