linux-kernel - Re: [RFT PATCH] regulator: core: Require regulator drivers to check uV for get_optimum

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: <YwVZfyDflFuzFAOX@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Tue, 23 Aug 2022 23:49:35 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:     Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFT PATCH] regulator: core: Require regulator drivers to check
 uV for get_optimum_mode()

On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 03:32:44PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:

> I guess maybe we could add the "initial mode" as an implicitly allowed
> mode? I guess the other option is to implicitly disable
> regulator-allow-set-load if no allowed modes are listed? Both of these

We should do the former, or equivalently just noop out of set_load() via
set_optimium_mode() if no modes are allowed.

> I guess the other option would be to say that if
> "regulator-allow-set-load" is set but not "regulator-allowed-modes"
> then we allow all modes? Somehow that doesn't seem like the "safest"
> option, though.

Yes, I'd prefer to avoid that.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)