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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:47:37 -0500 From: Leo Li <pku.leo@...il.com> To: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> Cc: Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>, Gao Pan <pandy.gao@....com>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, "linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] i2c: imx: make bus recovery through pinctrl optional On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 01:34:31PM -0700, Stefan Agner wrote: >> Yeah it is a bit a wording thing: In my understanding, pinctrl is >> required on SoC's witch have a pin controller... It is just that the >> driver does not need to get the pinctrl by itself because the stack is >> taking care of it implicitly. And yes, that makes the particular example >> not a real world example. > > At first I thought, too, that it's a fatal problem if getting the > pinctrl stuff fails. IMHO that shows that the comments (or the code) are > still not good enough. Ya. If it has confused more than one people, it is likely to confuse more. I agree with you that we should make it more clear. Thanks, Leo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists