netdev - Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 2/2] NFC: nxp-nci: Add pad supply voltage pvdd-supply

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: <4c37d4cd-cb8f-8c73-e09b-37e32cd79c30@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 21:32:18 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Raymond Hackley <raymondhackley@...tonmail.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
 Jeremy Kerr <jk@...econstruct.com.au>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 2/2] NFC: nxp-nci: Add pad supply voltage
 pvdd-supply

On 09/06/2023 20:37, Raymond Hackley wrote:
> PN547/553, QN310/330 chips on some devices require a pad supply voltage
> (PVDD). Otherwise, the NFC won't power up.
> 
> Implement support for pad supply voltage pvdd-supply that is enabled by
> the nxp-nci driver so that the regulator gets enabled when needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Raymond Hackley <raymondhackley@...tonmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/nfc/nxp-nci/i2c.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/nfc/nxp-nci/i2c.c b/drivers/nfc/nxp-nci/i2c.c
> index d4c299be7949..6f01152d2c83 100644
> --- a/drivers/nfc/nxp-nci/i2c.c
> +++ b/drivers/nfc/nxp-nci/i2c.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ struct nxp_nci_i2c_phy {
>  
>  	struct gpio_desc *gpiod_en;
>  	struct gpio_desc *gpiod_fw;
> +	struct regulator *pvdd;
>  
>  	int hard_fault; /*
>  			 * < 0 if hardware error occurred (e.g. i2c err)
> @@ -263,6 +264,20 @@ static const struct acpi_gpio_mapping acpi_nxp_nci_gpios[] = {
>  	{ }
>  };
>  
> +static void nxp_nci_i2c_poweroff(void *data)
> +{
> +	struct nxp_nci_i2c_phy *phy = data;
> +	struct device *dev = &phy->i2c_dev->dev;
> +	struct regulator *pvdd = phy->pvdd;
> +	int r;
> +
> +	if (!IS_ERR(pvdd) && regulator_is_enabled(pvdd)) {
> +		r = regulator_disable(pvdd);
> +		if (r < 0)
> +			dev_warn(dev, "Failed to disable regulator pvdd: %d\n", r);

Why resending? This should be explained.

It's like third or fourth patchset today. You need to slow down.
Unresolved comments from v2, so I still don't agree with this. I don't
like that I have to write the same three times because you sent three
patchsets...

Best regards,
Krzysztof