| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200803122139.48911.david-b@pacbell.net> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:39:48 -0800 From: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> To: ian <spyro@....com> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [UPDATED v3][PATCH 1/7] regulator: consumer interface On Wednesday 12 March 2008, ian wrote: > > > > To me, they aren't regulators at all. :) > > I dunno. > > Regulate - to control. > > A switch certainly controls voltage. You could stretch the terminology that way, yes. > Admittedly the granularity is a > little coarser than a nice digitally controlled regulator, but it fits > the model... Yet if you go into a parts catalog, you'll see that regulators and switches (low side, high side, etc) are different parts. Also, that many (most?) regulators aren't switchable. Given my druthers, there'd be no repurposing of common terms like "switch" and "regulator". That's all I'm getting at; in normal usage, they are two different things. (And what we care about is their output -- a power domain, possibly shared, possibly somewhat controllable -- not how it works.) - Dave -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists