linux-kernel - Re: Regulator regression in next-20180305

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:   Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:10:27 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Maciej Purski <m.purski@...sung.com>
Cc:     Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: Regulator regression in next-20180305

On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 01:57:12PM +0100, Maciej Purski wrote:

> I'm trying to figure out what is so special about these boards. The only
> strange thing, that I haven't noticed at first, is that all regulators share
> a common supply - dummy regulator. It is defined in anatop_regulator.c.

No, that's a regulator framework thing - the regulator framework will
use the dummy regulator as a supply when there's nothing described in
the DT so long as the client doesn't explicitly tell it that the supply
might be optional.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)