linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Skip balancing of the enabled regulators in 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:29:00 +0200
From:   Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
Cc:     Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Skip balancing of the enabled
 regulators in regulator_enable()

Hi Mark,

On 08.10.2019 20:07, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 09:00:29PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> Properly handling case of a disabled coupled regulator certainly will be
>> useful, but looks like there are no real users for that feature right
>> now and thus no real testing is done.
> Right, sorry - I missed the double negative there.

Okay, then what is the conclusion, as I got lost a bit? How do you want 
this issue to be fixed?

Best regards

-- 
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland