linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] regulator: Only enable disabled regulators on resume

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <55002065.9070206@collabora.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:00:53 +0100
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] regulator: Only enable disabled regulators on resume

On 03/11/2015 11:57 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 08:40:20AM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> On 03/08/2015 08:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > You mean _do_enable(), not _enable() here.  It's not really a leftover
> 
>> No, I meant _enable() here. What I said is that _enable() is checking
>> if -EINVAL was returned by _is_enabled():
> 
> Then we have an abstraction problem if we're trying to do things in
> plain _enable() - _do_enable() is supposed to be hiding all this stuff.
> 

Agreed.

Best regards,
Javier
--
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/