linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] max8903: cleans up confusing relationship between dc

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: <57639765.3030101@samsung.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Jun 2016 08:23:33 +0200
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Chris Lapa <chris@...a.com.au>, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	dbaryshkov@...il.com, sre@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
	robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] max8903: cleans up confusing relationship between
 dc_valid, dok and dcm.

On 06/17/2016 07:00 AM, Chris Lapa wrote:
> From: Chris Lapa <chris@...a.com.au>
> 
> The max8903_charger.h file indicated that dcm and dok were not optional
> when dc_valid is set.
> 
> It makes sense to have dok as a compulsory pin when dc_valid is given.
> However dcm can be optionally wired to a fixed level especially when the
> circuit is configured for dc power exclusively.
> 
> The previous implementation already allowed for this somewhat, however no
> error was given if dok wasn't given whilst dc_valid was.
> 
> The new implementation enforces dok presence when dc_valid is given. Whilst
> allowing dcm to be optional.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chris Lapa <chris@...a.com.au>
> ---
>  drivers/power/max8903_charger.c       | 23 ++++++++++-------------
>  include/linux/power/max8903_charger.h |  6 +++---
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

Code looks correct:
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>

Best regards,
Krzysztof