linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/10] regulator: max77686: Let core handle GPIO descriptor

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, 28 Nov 2018 15:24:23 +0000
From:   Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] regulator: max77686: Let core handle GPIO
 descriptor

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:43:48AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> Use the gpiod_get_from_of_node() rather than the devm_*
> version so that the regulator core can handle the lifecycle
> of these descriptors.
> 
> Fixes: 96392c3d8ca4 ("regulator: max77686: Pass descriptor instead of GPIO number")
> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/regulator/max77686-regulator.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/max77686-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/max77686-regulator.c
> index f5cee1775905..236cd42002f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/max77686-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/max77686-regulator.c
> @@ -255,8 +255,7 @@ static int max77686_of_parse_cb(struct device_node *np,
>  	case MAX77686_BUCK8:
>  	case MAX77686_BUCK9:
>  	case MAX77686_LDO20 ... MAX77686_LDO22:
> -		config->ena_gpiod = devm_gpiod_get_from_of_node(max77686->dev,
> -				np,
> +		config->ena_gpiod = gpiod_get_from_of_node(np,

As this is inside the of_parse_cb, it probably needs some thought
on where the GPIO would need to be freed on which error paths, I
am not sure it is immediately obvious to me but I suspect it will
need to be freed in some cases.

Thanks,
Charles