linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: Add coupled regulator

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, 5 Feb 2016 15:32:58 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: Add coupled regulator

On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 03:33:28PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:28:02PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:46:49PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:

> > > Anyway, I'm fine with both approaches, just let me know what you
> > > prefer.

> > Without seeing an implementation of the lists it's hard to say.

> Just to make sure we're on the same page: you want to keep the
> regulator, but instead of giving the parent through vinX-supplies
> properties, you want to have a single *-supply property, with a list
> of regulators, right?

Either that or an explicit regulator describing the merge.  Rob wants
the list I think but I really don't care.

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