linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFT v2 09/17] regulator: fixed: Add over current event

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:   Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:11:40 +0200
From:   Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
        Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
        David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        manjunath.goudar@...aro.org,
        Alexandre Bailon <abailon@...libre.com>,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFT v2 09/17] regulator: fixed: Add over current event

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 06:46:26PM +0200, ahaslam@...libre.com wrote:
>
>> +             if (ret) {
>> +                     pr_err("Failed to request irq: %d\n", ret);
>
> dev_err()
>
>> +++ b/include/linux/regulator/consumer.h
>> @@ -74,6 +74,10 @@
>>   *             the most noisy and may not be able to handle fast load
>>   *             switching.
>>   *
>> + * OVERCURRENT Regulator has detected an overcurrent condition, and
>> + *             may be limiting the supply output.
>> + *
>> + *
>>   * NOTE: Most regulators will only support a subset of these modes. Some
>>   * will only just support NORMAL.
>>   *
>> @@ -84,6 +88,7 @@
>>  #define REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL                        0x2
>>  #define REGULATOR_MODE_IDLE                  0x4
>>  #define REGULATOR_MODE_STANDBY                       0x8
>> +#define REGULATOR_MODE_OVERCURRENT           0x10
>
> This is adding a new core feature with a new mode and should have been
> split out of the driver specific change with a spearate changelog.  Why

Ok, will do.

> does it make sense to report this as a mode, we don't report other error
> conditions as modes but instead use REGULATOR_STATUS_ with the
> get_status() operation?

I used mode, because when the regulator toggles the overcurrent
line, it means that it has entered a current limited mode, at least the
regulator im looking at. ill change to STATUS

Regards
Axel