linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] power: domain: Add driver for a PM domain provider which controls

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: <CAEHkU3VVM0zUsaKMUGeSzfbLmVJW6rqXGLv7TqaLTEQeXEVkUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Jun 2022 18:10:48 +0200
From:   Max Krummenacher <max.oss.09@...il.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Max Krummenacher <max.krummenacher@...adex.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Andrejs Cainikovs <andrejs.cainikovs@...adex.com>,
        Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] power: domain: Add driver for a PM domain provider
 which controls

Hi

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 9:22 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 9:15 PM Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 05:08:46PM +0200, Max Krummenacher wrote:
> > > From: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenacher@...adex.com>
> > >
> > > its power enable by using a regulator.
> > >
> > > The currently implemented PM domain providers are all specific to
> > > a particular system on chip.
> >
> > Yes, power domains tend to be specific to an SoC... 'power-domains' is
> > supposed to be power islands in a chip. Linux 'PM domains' can be
> > anything...

I don't see why such power islands should be restricted to a SoC. You can
build the exact same idea on a PCB or even more modular designs.

>
> > > This allows to use the "regulator-pm-pd" driver with an arbitrary
> > > device just by adding the 'power-domains' property to the devices
> > > device tree node. However the device's dt-bindings schema likely does
> > > not allow the property 'power-domains'.
> > > One way to solve this would be to allow 'power-domains' globally
> > > similarly how 'status' and other common properties are allowed as
> > > implicit properties.
> >
> > No. For 'power-domains' bindings have to define how many there are and
> > what each one is.
>
> IMO "power-domains" are an integration feature, i.e. orthogonal to the
> actual device that is part of the domain.  Hence the "power-domains"
> property may appear everywhere.
>
> It is actually the same for on-chip devices, as an IP core may be
> reused on a new SoC that does have power or clock domains.  For
> these, we managed to handle that fine because most devices do have
> some form of family- or SoC-specific compatible values to control if
> the power-domains property can be present/is required or not.
>
> But for off-chip devices, the integrator (board designed) can do
> whatever he wants.  Off-chip devices do have the advantage that it
> is usually well documented which power supply (if there are multiple)
> serves which purpose, which is not always clear for on-chip devices.
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                         Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>                                 -- Linus Torvalds