linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: fan53880: Add missing .owner field 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <159404660937.36664.2923875369342917442.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 06 Jul 2020 15:43:29 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Christoph Fritz <chf.fritz@...glemail.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fan53880: Add missing .owner field in regulator_desc

On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 16:09:44 +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> Add missing .owner field in regulator_desc, which is used for refcounting.

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] regulator: fan53880: Add missing .owner field in regulator_desc
      commit: 6c814b676e8bab850b64ab76a035571773c65727

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark