linux-kernel - Re: Optional regulators in bulk operations

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: <b0594876-fa4c-9d8c-5c11-960ceab43676@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2017 22:59:24 +0100
From:   Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
To:     bjorn.andersson@...aro.org
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Optional regulators in bulk operations - reverted patch

Am 31.01.2017 um 22:43 schrieb Heiner Kallweit:
> Hi Bjorn,
> 
> I just came across a use case where I wanted to deal with optional
> regulators in bulk operations. I was about to submit a related
> patch when I saw that you submitted basically the same in
> 3ff3f518a135 "regulator: Make bulk API support optional supplies"
> and reverted it later stating that you misunderstood the API.
> 
> How does this extension break the API? To me it sounds like a
> neat feature.
> 
> The only thing I can think of if that we have to assume that
> struct regulator_bulk_data is zero-initialized to ensure
> backwards-compatibility (use "normal" get as default).
> 
> Rgds, Heiner
> 
Sorry for the noise, I got it meanwhile.