linux-kernel - Re: [lm-sensors] lm90 driver no longer working on PCs in 3.13

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: <20140126235103.GP11727@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 26 Jan 2014 23:51:03 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	LM Sensors <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] lm90 driver no longer working on PCs in 3.13

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 02:04:06PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:

> I think I have a better idea: Surround the regulator code, or at least
> its error handling, in the lm90 driver with

> 	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) {
> 	}

> Would that be ok ? If yes I'll submit a patch. I'll do the same in
> another driver I am working on.

That's not going to have the desired effect in cases where DT is built
into the kernel but not in use on the current system (which is a
configuration that gets used) and will remove error handling for non-DT
systems that do have regulators set up.  There's not the relationship
between this and DT that you seem think there is...

Besides, if we're going to do a bodge like that we should do it in the
core and not in individual callers.

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