linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] mfd: MAX6650/6651 support

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:	Fri, 14 Feb 2014 09:02:20 +0000
From:	Laszlo Papp <lpapp@....org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@...aro.org>,
	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] mfd: MAX6650/6651 support

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 04:02:40AM +0000, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>
>> +const struct regmap_config max665x_regmap_config = {
>> +     .reg_bits = 5,
>> +};
>
> This would normally be static too, and I'd *really* expect to see a
> val_bits set here.  I'm a bit surprised this works without one.

Makes sense, thanks. Shall I also set the .max_register or any other
mandatory variables in here?

>> +     mutex_init(&max665x->iolock);
>
> What is this needed for?

It was done for consistency with the other mfd drivers (maxim), e.g.
8997 or 8998 as the closest resemblence in this family. Would you
prefer me removing this mutex locker?
--
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/