linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] regulator: tps65086: Add regulator driver for the TPS65086 PMIC

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: <20151122131321.GM26072@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:13:21 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	"Andrew F. Davis" <afd@...com>
Cc:	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] regulator: tps65086: Add regulator driver for the
 TPS65086 PMIC

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 02:40:50PM -0600, Andrew F. Davis wrote:
> On 11/21/2015 07:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

> >An earlier version of this patch has already been applied, please don't
> >resend already applied patches but send incremental patches with any
> >changes.

> Odd, I didn't seem to get any message for this getting applied. Looks
> like only a couple lines difference from the version in the regulators
> branch, I don't imagine you are able to rebase that with these changes?

As a matter of policy I try to avoid rewriting history unless it is
really required.

> Anyway the reason that line needed changed is over a confusion in
> what the 'of_node' does in 'struct regulator_config'. The description
> seems to make it seem like it is the node that gets checked for
> init data.

The current behaviour is the intended behaviour.

> >* @of_node: OpenFirmware node to parse for device tree bindings (may be
> >*           NULL).

> But the 'of_node' that is actually searched is the one given in
> regulator_config->dev->of_node. Is this intended behavior (drivers
> assume it is so it probably has to be now) and if so, the above
> description might need to be clarified as too what that 'of_node'
> pointer really does?

Please submit a patch with any clarification you think is needed.
of_node is the name of the container subnode of the main node for the
device where we look for init data - both are used.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)