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]

Message-ID: <52040DE2.50201@roeck-us.net>
Date:	Thu, 08 Aug 2013 14:30:10 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>, swarren@...dotorg.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lm-sensors@...sensors.org,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, MLongnecker@...dia.com,
	khali@...ux-fr.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control

On 08/08/2013 02:18 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:00:26PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:15:54PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>>> Sure, that's the transition issues I mentioned - the regulator API does
>>> have stubbing facilities which should cover things and it's very easy to
>>> define stub regulators if you need to.  Like I say I expect this to be a
>>> lot easier after the next merge window as another way of doing stubs is
>>> being added which should make this even easier by avoiding disrupting
>>> drivers that do genuinely want to check for absent supplies and handle
>>> that better.
>
>> We will need to make sure that all dts files using any of the compatible chips
>> are updated accordingly. There are several entries in various dts files for
>> adm1032, adt7461, lm90, and nct1008.
>
> Yes, and probably also board files as well.  Or either just accept
> bisection trouble for now or wait till the better stubbing is in there -

Ah, that is exactly the trouble I wanted to avoid.

> that will mean that for DT systems the core will just assume the supply
> is really there and not fail requests if it's not in the DT.
>
>>> The names requested by a driver are defined with regard to the device
>>> and should be the names used by the chip itself as defined in the
>
>> 9 votes for vdd, 11 votes for vcc, one undecided (no datasheet available).
>> Guess one is as good as the other ;-).
>
> What I've suggested before is to use the name from the part for which
> the driver is named.  Assuming the vendor doesn't randomly change their
> datasheet (but that causes problems for hardware engineers so tends to
> be avoided).
>
Makes sense.

Guenter

--
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/