linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 04/10] regulator: fixed: add support for ACPI interface

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: <571ED178.4090700@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:24:56 +0800
From:	Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com,
	Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
	MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 04/10] regulator: fixed: add support for ACPI interface

Hi Mark,

On 04/26/2016 01:30 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 04:04:50PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>
>> +	ret = device_property_read_string(dev, "gpio-name", &gpio_name);
>> +	if (!ret) {
>> +		gpiod = gpiod_get(dev, gpio_name, GPIOD_ASIS);
>> +		if (!IS_ERR(gpiod)) {
> This doesn't look like it's a standard ACPI binding for GPIOs, why are
> we using a property to get the GPIO noame?

The GPIO name might be different in different use cases. For my case,
it is "vbus_en", but other cases should use the different name.

On ACPI compatible platforms, GPIO resources are reported via ACPI
tables and (devm_)gpiod_get() hides the APCI complexity and returns
the gpiod according to "gpio_name".

Best regards,
Lu Baolu