linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] power: act8945a: add charger driver for the sub-device of ACT8945A MFD

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: <5695B2DD.3000504@samsung.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Jan 2016 11:13:49 +0900
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Wenyou Yang <wenyou.yang@...el.com>,
	Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	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>
Cc:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] power: act8945a: add charger driver for the
 sub-device of ACT8945A MFD

On 13.01.2016 10:48, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 12.01.2016 17:09, Wenyou Yang wrote:
>> The ACT8945A is a Multi Function Device with the following subdevices:
>>  - Regulator
>>  - Charger
>>
>> This patch set is to add regulator driver for ACT8945A.
>> It is based on the patch set:
>> 	[PATCH v2] mfd: act8945a: add Active-semi ACT8945A PMIC MFD driver
>>
> 
> The useful information would be can be applied independently to other
> tree than MFD.

Oh damn, that was far from English. I meant:

The useful information would be whether it can be applied independently
from that patchset.

>From the sentence above I would guess not (in that
case don't send it as separate patchset)... but from the code I think it
could (because it depends on MFD_ACT8945A so no build errors).

Anyway please mark it explicitly - it helps the maintainer to make the
decision.

Best regards,
Krzysztof