linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] drivers: reset: Add STM32 reset driver

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]

Message-ID: <1467725370.2978.64.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Tue, 05 Jul 2016 15:29:30 +0200
From:	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
To:	Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@...com>
Cc:	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, patrice.chotard@...com,
	alexandre.torgue@...com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] drivers: reset: Add STM32 reset driver

Am Dienstag, den 05.07.2016, 09:29 +0200 schrieb Gabriel Fernandez:
[...]
> >> +static const struct reset_control_ops stm32_reset_ops = {
> >> +	.assert		= stm32_reset_assert,
> >> +	.deassert	= stm32_reset_deassert,
> > Are the registers not readable, or did you choose not to
> > implement .status on purpose?
> We choose to not implement.

Ok. Because of size issues or just because you don't need them in any of
your drivers?

regards
Philipp