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: <20180424084124.6tpxf3ekadzefwd4@verge.net.au>
Date:   Tue, 24 Apr 2018 10:41:25 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
        Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] backlight: pwm_bl: don't use GPIOF_* with
 gpiod_get_direction

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:12:57AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Simon Horman wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:32:40PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > The documentation was wrong, gpiod_get_direction() returns 0/1 instead
> > > of the GPIOF_* flags. The docs were fixed with commit 94fc73094abe47
> > > ("gpio: correct docs about return value of gpiod_get_direction"). Now,
> > > fix this user (until a better, system-wide solution is in place).
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
> > > Acked-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>
> 
> Thanks for the Reviewed-by Simon.  I have applied it to the original mail.
> 
> Do you know why you mail wasn't sent attached to the original thread?
> For some reason I received this mail on it's own i.e. not in reply
> to the original.

No, not off hand. Perhaps I responded to the email in some unusual way
but by now I don't recall. In any case I'll try to be more careful
in future.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ