linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] regulator: of: Does always-on imply on-in-suspend?

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]

Message-ID: <20191216172536.GH4161@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 16 Dec 2019 17:25:36 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Robert Karszniewicz <r.karszniewicz@...tec.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] regulator: of: Does always-on imply on-in-suspend?

On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 06:06:20PM +0100, Robert Karszniewicz wrote:
> Hi all.
> 
> Just to make sure; the oftree property regulator-always-on implies that for
> every suspend state, the property regulator-on-in-suspend is implicit? With no
> other side-effect? Reading the documentation, this is what I interpret.

Please don't send cover letters for single patches, if there is anything
that needs saying put it in the changelog of the patch or after the ---
if it's administrative stuff.  This reduces mail volume and ensures that 
any important information is recorded in the changelog rather than being
lost. 

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