linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: Provide dummy supply support

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:	Tue, 1 Nov 2011 18:27:21 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
Cc:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Provide dummy supply support

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:50:14PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 28 October 2011 18:47:57 Sascha Hauer wrote:

> > > We already have a dummy regulator driver and a fixed voltage regulator
> > > driver, we shouldn't be adding a third implementation of the same thing.
> > > Just use the fixed voltage regulator for this.

> > I explained in my mail why I think that the current implementation of
> > the dummy regulator is not suitable for things apart from debugging.

> your complaints seem to be specific to how the dummy regulator gets hooked in 
> and not in the specific regulator implementation.  so it seems like the right 
> thing would be to split the kconfig knobs:

Quite.  Sascha, your mail doesn't refer to the implementation of the
regulator itself at all.  Nothing in your changelog even mentions that
you're introducing a new regulator driver.

I think there's a big abstraction understanding failure here, reading
your changelog I'm not sure you understand the existing mechainsms that
are in place.  You say:

| This patch allows a board to register dummy supplies for devices
| which need a regulator but which is not software controllable
| on this board.

but this is exactly the use case the fixed voltage regulator is there
for.

>  config REGULATOR_DUMMY
> -	bool "Provide a dummy regulator if regulator lookups fail"
> +	bool "Provide a dummy regulator"
> +config REGULATOR_DUMMY_FALLBACK
> +	bool "Fallback to dummy regulator if lookup fails"
> +	depends on REGULATOR_DUMMY

As I think I said earlier I'd use the fixed regulator for this, all
Sascha's actually doing here is adding a wrapper to simplify
registration of that.
--
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/