linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] mmc: renesas_sdhi: Add support for RZ/V2H(P) SoC

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: <kphyk4vpp2yxikuwob6x567ob7nujzxi4z4smyqcpwgrrqdded@ujmtdavcdjdo>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 09:42:47 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>, 
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, 
	Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>, Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro.jz@...esas.com>, 
	Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] mmc: renesas_sdhi: Add support for RZ/V2H(P)
 SoC


> Probably I am missing something obvious in the big picture, but why
> must this be modelled as a regulator?  Can't the SDHI driver handle
> this register bit directly?

I suggested it because we already use external regulators with SDHI. So,
I preferred the design where the internal regulator was just another
regulator. Then, the SDHI core can just keep using regulator API. And
not have two code paths for internal vs. external. Did I miss something?


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)