linux-kernel - Re: [NEW DRIVER V3 1/8] DA9058 MFD core driver

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:	Wed, 15 Aug 2012 19:53:17 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Anthony Olech <anthony.olech.opensource@...semi.com>
Cc:	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>,
	Steven Toth <stoth@...nellabs.com>,
	Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...nellabs.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Dajun Chen <david.chen@...semi.com>
Subject: Re: [NEW DRIVER V3 1/8] DA9058 MFD core driver

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 04:05:21PM +0100, Anthony Olech wrote:

>  
>  if HAS_IOMEM
> +
>  menu "Multifunction device drivers"

This random change is still present from the first version....

> +	/*
> +	 * the init_board_irq() call-back function should be defined in
> +	 * the machine driver initialization code and is used to set up
> +	 * the actual (probably GPIO) line as an interrupt line.
> +	 */
> +	if (pdata->init_board_irq) {
> +		ret = pdata->init_board_irq();
> +		if (ret)
> +			goto failed_to_setup_the_actual_i2c_hw_irq;
> +	}

You appear to have ignored my previous review comments about this...  it
still shouldn't be needed with modern kernels.

> +static bool da9058_register_volatile(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
> +{
> +	switch (reg) {
> +	case DA9058_ADCMAN_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ADCRESH_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ADCRESL_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ALARMD_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ALARMH_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ALARMMI_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ALARMMO_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ALARMS_REG:
> +	case DA9058_ALARMY_REG:

Are all the alarm registers really volatile?

> +	case DA9058_LDO9_REG:
> +	case DA9058_TOFFSET_REG:
> +	default:
> +		return false;

Just use the default.

> +static struct regulator_consumer_supply platform_vddarm_consumers[] = {
> +	{.supply = "vcc",}
> +};

No, this and all your other regulator configuration is board specific.
--
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/