linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Regulator state after regulator

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: <20110428102009.GB14494@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:20:10 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	kalle.jokiniemi@...ia.com
Cc:	Sakari.Ailus@...ia.com, lrg@...mlogic.co.uk, mchehab@...radead.org,
	svarbatov@...sol.com, saaguirre@...com, grosikopulos@...sol.com,
	vimarsh.zutshi@...ia.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Regulator state after regulator_get

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 09:44:10AM +0000, kalle.jokiniemi@...ia.com wrote:

>  > Another alternative to the first option you proposed could be to add a
>  > flags field to regulator_consumer_supply, and use a flag to recognise
>  > regulators which need to be disabled during initialisation. The flag
>  > could be set by using a new macro e.g. REGULATOR_SUPPLY_NASTY() when
>  > defining the regulator.

> This sounds like a good option actually. Liam, Mark, any opinions?

I'm not sure what "supply_nasty" would mean?  This also doesn't seem
like something that we can set up per supply - it's going to affect the
whole regulator state, it's not something that only affects a single
supply.
--
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/