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: <20111019053354.GB31162@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net>
Date:	Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:33:55 +0800
From:	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC:	<patches@...aro.org>, <tony@...mide.com>,
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<grant.likely@...retlab.ca>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	<lrg@...com>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] regulator: helper routine to extract
 regulator_init_data

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 05:00:46PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 07:58:37PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> 
> > I understand that ideally device tree is supposed to describe pure
> > hardware configurations.  But practically, when migrating a driver
> > to device tree probe, we are trying to move the configurations
> > described by platform_data into device tree to save the use of
> > platform_data for device tree probe.  Then some of the configuration
> > may not be so purely hardware related.  But I do not see this is a
> > critical problem.
> 
> It's not just Linux-specific stuff, some of this is even specific to
> what current Linux drivers can do - updating the kernel could mean a
> different set of constraints.
> 
Well, from what I see, the 'struct regulation_constraints' is defined
in machine.h and meant to be the regulator machine/board interface.
With the example I'm looking at, mc13892, the regulation_constraints
configuration is fully passed from machine/board file.  If there is
something specific to what drivers can do, it probably should be encoded
in regulator driver rather than staying in regulation_constraints.

So how do you think we should proceed here?

-- 
Regards,
Shawn

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ