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: <5BD06B96.3080809@st.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Oct 2018 12:54:46 +0000
From:   Pascal PAILLET-LME <p.paillet@...com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     "dmitry.torokhov@...il.com" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        "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>,
        "wim@...ux-watchdog.org" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
        "benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org" <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
        "eballetbo@...il.com" <eballetbo@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/8] regulator: stpmic1: add stpmic1 regulator driver

Hello Mark,

Le 10/19/2018 01:50 PM, Mark Brown a écrit :
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 09:02:12AM +0000, Pascal PAILLET-LME wrote:
>
>> +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(stpmic1_regulator_cfgs); i++) {
>> +		/* Parse DT & find regulators to register */
>> +		init_data = stpmic1_regulators_matches[i].init_data;
>> +		if (init_data)
>> +			init_data->regulator_init = &stpmic1_regulator_parse_dt;
>> +
>> +		rdev = stpmic1_regulator_register(pdev, i, init_data, regul);
>> +		if (IS_ERR(rdev))
>> +			return PTR_ERR(rdev);
> This looks mostly good, the only big thing is this - the default is to
> just unconditionally register all the regulators that exist rather than
> only those that are configured on that particular platform.  This is a
> bit simpler and means that all the readback of the configuration for the
> unconfigured regulators is available for diagnostics.  Is there a reason
> not to do that?
I'm sorry, I'm not sure to understand. Would you prefer to not register 
regulators that
are not described in the device-tree ?

In that case I could add:
     if (!init_data)
         continue;

This would permit to keep some regulators unmodified by the kernel. This 
can be useful
because we have some regulators configured by boot loaders (for the DDR 
at least) and
it would be more simple to not handle them in the kernel.

best regards,
pascal

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ