linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] leds: lm3601x: Introduce the lm3601x LED 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]

Message-ID: <4a631a8e-18ba-0886-039e-004980ae0cc3@ti.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 May 2018 15:13:34 -0500
From:   Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
CC:     Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
        <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <mark.rutland@....com>, <afd@...com>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] leds: lm3601x: Introduce the lm3601x LED driver

Pavel

On 05/14/2018 03:05 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>>> OK.
>>
>> OK I looked at the max776973 driver and well if the flash-max-microamp and
>> flash-max-timeout-us nodes are missing it sets a default value for each if the
>> node is not present.
>>
>> So should we remove this code from the Max77693 driver too and fail probe as being asked
>> in this driver?
> 
> Well, modifying driver without access to the hardware is tricky
> :-(. If it does something stupid (like using other than minimum values
> for the flash-max-microamp/flash-max-timeout-us), it needs to be
> fixed.

Well we should be able to test the probe/parse dt node and reject the probe if the node is not
present.  That can be done without HW the setup is done pretty early in the probe without even attempting to communicate
with the hardware.

Dan

> 
> And maybe comment "don't copy this, its wrong" would be in order...
> > Best regards,
> 									Pavel
> 


-- 
------------------
Dan Murphy