linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: gpio: Don't require a regulator-type property

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, 05 Dec 2013 01:44:42 +0100
From:	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: gpio: Don't require a regulator-type property

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the patch.

On Thursday 05 December 2013 00:31:55 Mark Brown wrote:
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@...aro.org>
> 
> Since essentially all GPIO controlled regulators are voltage regulators
> make the regulator-type property optional, defaulting to voltage.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...aro.org>
> ---
> 
> Compile tested only.
> 
>  drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c
> b/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c index 234960dc9607..13ec94d984ca
> 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/gpio-regulator.c
> @@ -203,17 +203,15 @@ of_get_gpio_regulator_config(struct device *dev,
> struct device_node *np) }
>  	config->nr_states = i;
> 
> +	config->type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE;
>  	ret = of_property_read_string(np, "regulator-type", &regtype);
> -	if (ret < 0) {
> -		dev_err(dev, "Missing 'regulator-type' property\n");
> -		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +	if (ret >= 0) {
> +		if (!strncmp("voltage", regtype, 7))
> +			config->type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE;
> +		else if (!strncmp("current", regtype, 7))
> +			config->type = REGULATOR_CURRENT;

Should we warn or error in case of an unsupported value ?

>  	}
> 
> -	if (!strncmp("voltage", regtype, 7))
> -		config->type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE;
> -	else if (!strncmp("current", regtype, 7))
> -		config->type = REGULATOR_CURRENT;
> -
>  	return config;
>  }
-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

--
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/