linux-kernel - Re: Applied "regulator: max8973: add support for junction thermal warning" to the regulator tree

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: <20160306113550.GM18327@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 6 Mar 2016 18:35:50 +0700
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Applied "regulator: max8973: add support for junction thermal
 warning" to the regulator tree

On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 01:17:37PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:

> Here driver is built in binary and THERMAL is the loadable module.

> Do we really have THERMAL as module i.e. basic framework?

If randconfig can generate it it's valid.  

> -#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL_OF
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL
>  static int max8973_thermal_read_temp(void *data, int *temp)
>  {
>         struct max8973_chip *mchip = data;

That looks like a hack that might break, I'd not expect it to help here
and probably has some other config that can generate issues.  What I
think should be happening here is something like

	depends on THERMAL_OF if THERMAL_OF

or similar (ie, there's a direct dependency once the config is enabled).

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