linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 8/8] watchdog: bd70528: Initial support for ROHM BD70528 watchdog block

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:   Thu, 14 Feb 2019 08:18:49 +0000
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        mazziesaccount@...il.com, heikki.haikola@...rohmeurope.com,
        mikko.mutanen@...rohmeurope.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, broonie@...nel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, bgolaszewski@...libre.com,
        sre@...nel.org, lgirdwood@...il.com, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
        alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, wim@...ux-watchdog.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, bogdan-petru.chircu-mare@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 8/8] watchdog: bd70528: Initial support for ROHM
 BD70528 watchdog block

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019, Guenter Roeck wrote:

> On 2/13/19 5:37 AM, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > Initial support for watchdog block included in ROHM BD70528
> > power management IC.
> > 
> > Configurations for low power states are still to be checked.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
> > Acked-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> > ---
> > 
> > I maintained the ack from Guenter as only change is to use function
> > exported by MFD instead of pointer to function provided by MFD. Please
> > let me know if this is not Ok.
> > 
> 
> NP. With functions exported by MFD, my choice would have been to handle
> locking there as well with respective locking/unlocking functions exported.
> But that is your call to make, not mine.

FWIW, I agree.

[...]

Lots of superfluous quoting here mate.  Better to snip it off IMHO.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog