linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Remove WARs for handling of_get_named

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56E56327.9040908@nvidia.com>
Date:	Sun, 13 Mar 2016 18:25:03 +0530
From:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	<lgirdwood@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Remove WARs for handling of_get_named_gpio()
 return


On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:28 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 01:44:18PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> On Friday 11 March 2016 10:00 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>>> Remove the WAR implemented in fixed regulator to handle the
>>>> return of of_get_named_gpio().
>>> You need to explain what a WAR is, I suspect it's some nVidia internal
>>> term.
>> We used term "WAR" as workaround. This we used for special handling in SW
>> for unusual stuff.
>> Probably "Hack" is the more appropriate word.
>> Should I use "hack" here?
> What is wrong with "workaround"?  Or just generally write the commit
> message so someone outside nVidia can tell what the commit message
> means.


OK, will send the patch with term "workaround".