linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: max77693: Allow building 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:	Fri, 8 Apr 2016 05:54:45 +0200
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: max77693: Allow building as a module

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 02:29:47PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Apr 2016, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 
> > The consumer of max77693 regulators on Trats2 board (samsung-usb2-phy
> > driver) supports deferred probing so the max77693 main MFD driver can be
> > built now as a module. This gives more flexibility and removes manual
> > ordering of init calls.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
> > Cc: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mfd/Kconfig    |  4 ++--
> >  drivers/mfd/max77693.c | 14 ++------------
> >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> I assume this can be taken immediately and doesn't depend on anything
> external to the set?
> 
> For my own reference:
>   Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>

Hi,

Yes, this can be taken as is. Only second patch (changing defconfig)
depends on this. I can take the second patch through samsung tree but
that would require a tag/branch with this... which looks like an
overkill. So maybe you would take both?

Best regards,
Krzysztof