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]
Date:   Fri, 25 May 2018 14:31:30 +0300
From:   Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
        "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        "mturquette@...libre.com" <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        "sboyd@...nel.org" <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Mutanen, Mikko" <Mikko.Mutanen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        "Haikola, Heikki" <Heikki.Haikola@...rohmeurope.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] regulator: bd71837: Devicetree bindings for BD71837
 regulators

On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 11:24:58AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 08:54:30AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 06:57:21PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > You can look at the regulators node within the parent device, you know
> > > that in Linux the parent device will be the MFD.
> 
> > So I should parse the device-tree in MFD my driver in order to locate
> > the regulators node? Isn't that somewhat like code dublication? If we
> > rely on compatibles we can avoid device-tree parsing in MFD driver,
> 
> No, there's no need to do this - the child can just look at the of_node
> of the parent since it can never be instantiated otherwise.
> 
> > right? An in-tree example of this is:
> 
> There are some bad examples (and some where the same regulators can get
> used with multiple different parents) but that's no reason not to follow
> good practice.
Fair enough. I guess you may still know regulator subsystem better than I
do with my one month of experience ;) I'll follow your suggestion and
cook-up new patches.

Br,
    Matti Vaittinen

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ