linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: use correct device for device supply lookup

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: <20120519174052.GX4039@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date:	Sat, 19 May 2012 18:40:53 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
Cc:	"lrg@...com" <lrg@...com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: use correct device for device supply
 lookup

On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:50:54PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:

> > static struct regulator_dev *regulator_dev_lookup(struct device *dev,
> >                                                   const char *supply,
> >                                                   int *ret)
> >

> Also in regulator_register we set the of_node as

>        rdev->dev.of_node = config->of_node;

So, here we're just setting it to whatever the driver told us to use
which seems about right.

>         rdev->dev.parent = dev;

And here we're parenting the class device with the real device we were
passed which again seems obvious.

> Passed config->of_node will only be used if we pass the rdev->dev,
> not rdev->dev.parent

What does this mean and how is it related to anything you've said above?
I'm sorry but I really can't make head nor tail of what you're trying to
say here, there's just lots and lots of statements here but I'm
struggling to understand how they are related to each other.

> Am I missing anything here in understanding?

I certainly am.  Please go back to square one: what's the problem you
are seeing here?  Then go forward and step by step relate it to the code
change.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)