linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: mt6397: Constify struct 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: <1464053619.18442.11.camel@mtksdaap41>
Date:	Tue, 24 May 2016 09:33:39 +0800
From:	Henry Chen <henryc.chen@...iatek.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: mt6397: Constify struct regulator_ops

Hi Mark,

On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 12:32 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 03:30:16PM +0800, Henry Chen wrote:
> > Consitify the structure of regulator operations.
> 
> Oh, actually the mode setting patch does apply but it depends on this
> one (which was sent after...).  It would have been better to send a
> patch series for the driver and separately a patch series for the core,
> the driver changes are orthogonal to the core ones here.

Got it. Sorry for unawareness of the dependency issue and thanks for
kindly reminder.