linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] media: qcom: camss: Use common VFE pm_domain_on/pm_domain

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0bff0569-8571-4994-96f2-ebfa1b82c9aa@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 26 Oct 2023 21:01:20 +0200
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
        hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl, laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com,
        rfoss@...nel.org, todor.too@...il.com, agross@...nel.org,
        andersson@...nel.org, mchehab@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] media: qcom: camss: Use common VFE
 pm_domain_on/pm_domain_off where applicable



On 10/25/23 12:40, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 25/10/2023 10:18, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> educe the pattern down to a common callback. VFE 4.1 is a special case
>>> which to me also indicates that it is worthwhile maintaining an indirection
>>> for the vfe_pm_domain_{on|off} for now.
>> Are there issues when powering it off like all the others?
> 
> 4.1 doesn't have a VFE power-domain just a top level controller PD, however I think a blank callback is neater than
> 
> if (vfe->pm_domain_on) {
>      vfe->pd_domain_on();
> }
> 
> its just vfe->pm_domain_on(); at the cost of 1 or 2 instructions for indirection.
Right

Konrad