linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] drivers: regulator: qcom: add PMS405 SPMI regulator

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: <20190523131641.GD17245@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 23 May 2019 14:16:41 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Jorge Ramirez <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@...aro.org>
Cc:     lgirdwood@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, vinod.koul@...aro.org,
        niklas.cassel@...aro.org, khasim.mohammed@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drivers: regulator: qcom: add PMS405 SPMI regulator

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 10:35:46AM +0200, Jorge Ramirez wrote:

> Would you accept if I wrote a separate driver specific to pms405 or do
> you want me to integrate in qcom-spmi_regulator.c?

> I am asking because none of the ops will use the common functions (I
> wont be reusing much code from this qcom-spmi_regulator.c file)

I don't really mind, if there's nothing really shared then making it a
separate driver is probably best but it's not a strong opinion either
way.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)