linux-kernel - Re: [UPDATED v3][PATCH 4/7] regulator: framework core

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: <1204928391.13653.27.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:19:51 +0000
From:	Liam Girdwood <lg@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [UPDATED v3][PATCH 4/7] regulator: framework core

On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 08:10 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 06:11:54PM +0000, Liam Girdwood wrote:

> > +/**
> > + * struct regulator_cdev
> > + *
> > + * Voltage / Current regulator class device. One for each regulator.
> > + */
> > +struct regulator_cdev {
> > +	struct regulator_desc *desc;
> > +	int use_count;
> > +
> > +	struct list_head list;
> > +	struct list_head consumer_list;
> > +	struct blocking_notifier_head notifier;
> > +	struct mutex mutex; /* consumer lock */
> > +	struct module *owner;
> > +	struct class_device cdev;
> 
> Can you change this to use a "struct device" instead?  We are trying to
> get rid of class_device, and there are only 3 users of it in the kernel
> today (memorystick, infiniband, and scsi), and I have patches pending to
> fix all of these.  For 2.6.26 I would like to be rid of it finally.
> 
> If you want, I would be glad to fix this up for you, it should be a
> pretty simple replacement.
> 

Yes please. Much appreciated :)

> > +	struct regulation_constraints *constraints;
> > +	struct regulator_cdev *parent;	/* for tree */
> 
> And if when you convert, you can get rid of this pointer, it would not
> be needed.

Fwiw, the regulator-parent relationship is established by the platform
code after the regulator driver has registered all the regulator
devices. I assume we can just device_move() to re-parent. 

It may also be nice to have a link like /sys/power/regulator
-> /sys/devices/.../regulator 

> 
> > +	void *reg_data;		/* regulator_cdev data */
> 
> Nor would this one.  Actually I don't think you need this one today
> anyway...
> 

Agreed, this is just driver_data for the regulator driver.

Many Thanks

Liam

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/