linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] dt-bindings: mfd: Add TI TPS6594 PMIC

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: <2adad86c-1321-d5ab-839b-49273249718b@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 22:36:10 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Julien Panis <jpanis@...libre.com>, lee@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        corbet@....net, arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        derek.kiernan@...inx.com, dragan.cvetic@...inx.com
Cc:     eric.auger@...hat.com, jgg@...pe.ca, razor@...ckwall.org,
        stephen@...workplumber.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        christian.koenig@....com, contact@...rsion.fr,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, sterzik@...com, u-kumar1@...com,
        eblanc@...libre.com, jneanne@...libre.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] dt-bindings: mfd: Add TI TPS6594 PMIC

On 22/03/2023 14:55, Julien Panis wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/22/23 09:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 22/03/2023 09:01, Julien Panis wrote:
>>>>> +  ti,multi-phase-id:
>>>>> +    description: |
>>>>> +      Describes buck multi-phase configuration, if any. For instance, XY id means
>>>>> +      that outputs of buck converters X and Y are combined in multi-phase mode.
>>>>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array
>>>> No improvements here. As Rob pointed out, this looks like coupled
>>>> regulators.
>>> I used 'oneOf' logic to handle mutual exclusion. But it seems that I did not
>>> understand what you and Rob expected.
>>> Does some generic property already exist for 'coupled regulators' ?
>> Yes, see regulator.yaml binding.
> 
> Krzysztof, I talked with the regulator API/yaml maintainer.
> Actually, our multiphase concept is different than coupled regulators:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZBr+7X3lcFdI8p%2Fo@sirena.org.uk/
> 
> We must not use the generic 'coupled regulator' property here.
> So, 'ti,multi-phase-id' can be kept.

Yeah. I think we do not have generic property for this.

Best regards,
Krzysztof