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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 12 Apr 2019 21:54:55 +0800
From:   Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: regulator: ab8500: Question about AB8505_LDO_USB

Hi Lee,
In ab8500 regulator driver code, I found the AB8505_LDO_USB entry does
not has corresponding entry in ab8505_regulator_match.

ab8505 support is added by below commit:
547f384f33dbd6171607f925ab246e25e315961e regulator: ab8500: add
support for ab8505

For ab8505, I'm wondering if it make sense to remove AB8505_LDO_USB
entry from ab8505_regulator_info?
Since it's not in the ab8505_regulator_match, it won't be registered anyway.
For ab8500, you removed the USB regulator by
41a06aa738ad889cf96f56024ddf84ecf4a18a6f regulator: ab8500: Remove USB regulator
So I'm wondering if AB8505_LDO_USB is similar case.

Or does it make sense to add the corresponding entry to ab8505_regulator_match?

Thanks,
Axel

Powered by blists - more mailing lists