linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control

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:	Thu, 08 Aug 2013 13:57:14 +0400
From:	Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@...l.ru>
To:	Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>
Cc:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	swarren@...dotorg.org <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org 
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	lm-sensors@...sensors.org 
	<lm-sensors@...sensors.org>,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org 
	<linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	Matthew Longnecker <MLongnecker@...dia.com>,
	khali@...ux-fr.org <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control

> On 08/08/2013 04:42 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 08/07/2013 11:56 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
> >> The device lm90 can be controlled by the vdd rail.
> >> Adding the power control support to power on/off the vdd rail.
> >> And make sure that power is enabled before accessing the device.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>
> >> ---
> >>   drivers/hwmon/lm90.c |   49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[...]
> > I consider the messages unnecessary and confusing. You are polluting the log
> > of pretty much every PC user who has one of the supported chips in the system,
> > and of everyone else not using regulators for this chip.
> 
> Ok, I will remove these codes.
> So I will write something like:
> if (!IS_ERR(data->lm90_reg)) {
>     ret = regulator_enable(data->lm90_reg);
>     if (ret < 0) {
>         dev_err();
>         return ret;
>     }
> } else {
>     if (PTR_ERR(data->lm90_reg) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>         return -EPRPBE_DEFER;
> 
>         data->lm90_reg = !!IS_ERR(data->lm90_reg);

No. You do not need this line.

Just use in remove():
if (!IS_ERR(data->lm90_reg))
regulator_disable(data->lm90_reg);

---