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]

Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 09:45:41 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, 
	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


> > There is a similar instance of regulator driver [1] which is
> > controlled via register bit write, but in our case the SD_STATUS
> > register is part of the SDHI IP block itself.
> 
> ... I could imagine that the SDHI driver itself exposes a regulator
> driver. Just without a <reg>-property. The compatible will induce which
> register and bit to use.

That would mean we have a compatible-entry per SDHI instance per SoC?
Did I get this right? I think that will be too many compatibles.

What is the drawback of using an "internal-regulator" property within
the SDHI node?


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