linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/2] mfd: max14577: Allow the driver to be built as a module

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:22:58 -0300
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
To:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/2] mfd: max14577: Allow the driver to be built
 as a module

Hello Krzysztof,

On 03/16/2016 10:09 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 17.03.2016 01:48, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> This series is similar to [0] and allows the max14577 PMIC MFD driver to
>> be built as a module. Currently the Kconfig symbol for the driver is a
>> boolean but there isn't really a reason for this restriction.
>>
>> The patches have been just built tested because I don't have any of the
>> boards using this driver, so testing will be highly appreciated.
>>
> 
> Thanks for the patch (and checking of regulator users) but one of the
> reasons of putting this item on todo list was to check and test. The
> change itself is trivial, I could do it on myself, right? :) But the
> point is that it needs some testing...
>

Well, IMHO there is some value in posting a patch even if not tested
(provided that you make that clear like I did) since it is easier to
test a patch than write and test it ;)
 
> BR,
> Krzysztof
> 

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America