linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mmc: Add cap-aggressive-pm property

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2023 17:57:16 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Hermes Zhang <chenhuiz@...s.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc:     kernel@...s.com, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mmc: Add cap-aggressive-pm property

On 30/01/2023 07:54, Hermes Zhang wrote:
> On 2023/1/29 18:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 29/01/2023 03:36, Hermes Zhang wrote:
>>> This commit add a new property: cap-aggressive-pm to enable the
>> Do not use "This commit/patch".
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.17.1/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L95
> 
> Done
> 
>>> MMC_CAP_AGGRESSIVE_PM feature for (e)MMC/SD power saving.
>> Why this is a property suitable for DT? IOW, why this isn't enabled always?
> 
> This property will benfit for the power consumption, but it also may 
> degradation in performance as it will prevent the
> 
> the card from executing internal house-keeping operations in idle mode. 
> So it's better to config it from DT.

Why? DT is not for policy. How you described it, this is policy or
system tuning choice thus the job for Linux (OS), not for DT. So I will
repeat - why this property fits the purpose of DT (describe the hardware).

Best regards,
Krzysztof