linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: input: goodix: Add powered-in-suspend 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAD=FV=V8ZN3969RrPu2-zZYoEE=LDxpi8K_E8EziiDpGOSsq1w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Apr 2023 07:18:32 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Fei Shao <fshao@...omium.org>
Cc:     Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-mediatek <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: input: goodix: Add powered-in-suspend property

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 5:50 AM Fei Shao <fshao@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> We observed that on Chromebook device Steelix, if Goodix GT7375P
> touchscreen is powered in suspend (because, for example, it connects to
> an always-on regulator) and with the reset GPIO asserted, it will
> introduce about 14mW power leakage.
>
> This property is used to indicate that the touchscreen is powered in
> suspend. If it's set, the driver will stop asserting the reset GPIO in
> power-down, and it will do it in power-up instead to ensure that the
> state is always reset after resuming.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fei Shao <fshao@...omium.org>
> ---
>
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/goodix,gt7375p.yaml | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/goodix,gt7375p.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/goodix,gt7375p.yaml
> index ce18d7dadae2..942acb286d77 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/goodix,gt7375p.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/goodix,gt7375p.yaml
> @@ -43,6 +43,12 @@ properties:
>        itself as long as it allows the main board to make signals compatible
>        with what the touchscreen is expecting for its IO rails.
>
> +  powered-in-suspend:
> +    description:
> +      This indicates that the touchscreen is powered in suspend, so the driver
> +      will not assert the reset GPIO in power-down to prevent power leakage.
> +    type: boolean

This seems OK to me. The overall idea is that if we ever turn off the
power to the touchscreen we have to assert reset (active low) before
doing so, but we don't want to hold reset if we're not actually going
to turn the power off because it causes the touchscreen to go into a
high power state. This gets complicated if the power rail is always-on
or shared with another device.

Alternatives I could think of:

1. In the OS, monitor the regulator and see when it's about to go off
and then assert reset. This is what I tried to do in previous patches
but it got too messy in Linux. It also wasn't perfect since it's
(theoretically) possible for a regulator to turn off outside of the
scope of the OS (some PMICs will auto turn off rails when the main
processor says it's off).

2. In the OS, peek to see if our regulator is marked "always on". This
doesn't handle the shared rail case, of course. Also, regulators that
are "always on" from the OS perspective could still (theoretically)
get turned off at suspend time by the PMIC.

3. Don't even hook up the reset line and just leave the touchscreen
out of reset all the time. This has the disadvantage that we can't
reset the touchscreen if it gets into a bad state, which could be even
more important if the touchscreen is on an always-on or shared rail.

Given the above, the solution in ${SUBJECT} patch seems reasonable.

Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>