linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: core: Add early supply resolution for a bypassed 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160425165417.GN3217@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 25 Apr 2016 17:54:17 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Cc:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: core: Add early supply resolution for a
 bypassed regulator

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 03:44:24PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
> On 22/04/16 14:53, Mark Brown wrote:

> > We need to only *fail* in the bypass case.

> OK. So this is what I have now. Is it weird to return EPROBE_DEFER in 
> _regulator_get_voltage()? If so, I could add a test for bypass in the
> regulator_register().

It should be fine but perhaps print an error saying that it's a bypassed
regulator with no supply?  Deferring for no explicit reason can be
confusing.

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