linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] regulator: qcom: Rework to single platform device

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: <54F64B67.9060608@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Tue, 03 Mar 2015 16:01:43 -0800
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>
CC:	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] regulator: qcom: Rework to single platform device

On 03/03/15 15:52, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 02:32:35PM -0800, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>> On Tue 03 Mar 14:09 PST 2015, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> How does this work for the case where we may not want to add all the
>>> regulators that a PMIC supports. I'm mostly thinking about the case
>>> where we want to use the pm8xxx-regulator driver for a few regulators
>>> and so we omit them from the DT for the RPM regulators.
>> An empty or non-existing regulator of_node will still be registered, but
>> without REGULATOR_CHANGE_STATUS nor REGULATOR_CHANGE_VOLTAGE; so any
>> operation on this regulator will fail with an -EPERM.
> ...but of course we'd never try any operations on it anyway as there
> would be no consumers.

Yes sounds fine. The only concern is that we're probably wasting memory
with things that won't ever "match" something in DT.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

--
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/