linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] pinctrl: samsung: Use devres version of gpiochip_add

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:   Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:47:45 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc:     Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
        Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:WOLFSON MICROELECTRONICS DRIVERS" 
        <patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] pinctrl: samsung: Use devres version of gpiochip_add_data

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 01:52:14PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 03:35:04PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 01:27:16PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
>> > > Use devm_gpiochip_add_data to simplify the error path in
>> > > samsung_gpiolib_register. Additionally this would also fix a leak if
>> > > the pinctrl driver was unbound, although admittedly I can't see any
>> > > good use-case for doing so, but the driver does currently allow it.
>> >
>> > Driver does not allow unbinding (.suppress_bind_attrs = true)...
>> >
>>
>> Oops... sorry missed that.
>
> Can you resend with updated commit msg? I think it was not picked up by
> Linus yet.

I'm expecting you to pick it up and send to me by pull request now I guess,
or did we agree that a Samsung patches wouldn't be too voluminous this
cycle?

If you're OK with it, can we proceed to use you as Samsung patch
collection point for this kernel cycle from this moment on?

Yours,
Linus Walleij