linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] regulator: add QCOM RPMh regulator 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:31:36 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] regulator: add QCOM RPMh regulator driver

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 02:09:47PM -0700, David Collins wrote:
> On 04/24/2018 10:45 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

> > I think that's probably only OK if we have a specific error code for the
> > regulator being limited in this way otherwise our error handling for I/O
> > problems involves us trying to reconfigure supplies which seems like it
> > would be risky.  

> Would you be ok with -EAGAIN being used for this purpose?

Using -EAGAIN for "I can't ever read the configuration from this
regulator" doesn't seem right - it's not like any number of retries
will ever manage to read the value back.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)