linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 1/2] regulator: Add document for MT6323 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]

Message-ID: <56B9DF5D.2010501@openwrt.org>
Date:	Tue, 9 Feb 2016 13:45:17 +0100
From:	John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	chen.zhong@...iatek.com, HenryC.Chen@...iatek.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/2] regulator: Add document for MT6323 regulator



On 09/02/2016 13:41, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 08:40:36PM +0100, John Crispin wrote:
> 
>> +Required properties:
>> +- compatible: "mediatek,mt6323-regulator"
> 
> I'm really not happy with MFD subfunctions like this which add no
> information over the parent device name appearing directly in the
> binding, it results in us putting Linux specifics about how we split the
> device up into the driver.  It's not like this could realistically be
> used separately to the parent device.  Just have the MFD create the
> device directly or if the individual regulators are reusable IPs which
> can share a driver then describe them as such in the DT.
> 

Hi Mark,

How would you like it to be. i am failing to understand that from your
comment.

	John