linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp-x13s: keep less regulators always-on

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: <ZtsWe6IDKU4rvHIT@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 16:49:31 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp-x13s: keep less
 regulators always-on

On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 10:27:24PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 08:23:39PM GMT, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 4:04 PM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 02:20:22PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> > > >
> > > > Remove the regulator-always-on property from the ones that used to be
> > > > implicitly needed by the on-board WCN6855 now that its PMU is modeled in
> > > > device-tree.

> > > What makes you think s10b is only used by wcn6855?
> > 
> > I didn't say that. It's used by many components but they seem to be
> > all described in DT. But I get it, the schematics show it in so many
> > places, it would be risky to not keep it on.
> 
> Well, that depends on the consumers. If all consumers are good and
> voting, then it should be safe.

Right. But in this case, not all consumers are described in DT (e.g.
ddr) and this is effectively an always-on rail.

Johan