linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/15 v3] regulator: max8973: 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181206115321.GI16508@imbe.wolfsonmicro.main>
Date:   Thu, 6 Dec 2018 11:53:21 +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" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/15 v3] regulator: max8973: Let core handle GPIO
 descriptor

On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 12:47:46PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 11:34 AM Charles Keepax
> <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 09:58:30AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 4:33 PM Charles Keepax
> > > <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 03:42:06PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 2:43 PM Charles Keepax
> > > > > <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 01:47:12PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > You shouldn't really need to use unhinge, you can just use devm
> > on the path that doesn't pass it to the core and not on the
> > one that does. You just need to update the error case below it to
> > use config->ena_gpiod rather than gpiod.
> 
> Indeed I just think it will be confusing when people read the code.
> 
> It's better consistency if its just devm_* and the  we unhinge the
> one we pass to the regulator core IMO.
> 

That's ok no objections from my if you prefer it that way.

Thanks,
Charles