linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: pca9450: Fix return value when failing to get sd-vsel GPIO

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: <161418588690.2546.14072185578047048603.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 24 Feb 2021 16:58:06 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Schrempf Frieder <frieder.schrempf@...tron.de>
Cc:     Robin Gong <yibin.gong@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@...il.com>,
        Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: pca9450: Fix return value when failing to get sd-vsel GPIO

On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 16:08:04 +0100, Schrempf Frieder wrote:
> This fixes the return value of pca9450_i2c_probe() to use the correct
> error code when getting the sd-vsel GPIO fails.

Applied to

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

Thanks!

[1/1] regulator: pca9450: Fix return value when failing to get sd-vsel GPIO
      commit: ef4848a6532ba0b241d3b6cad70378ff2c5615ca

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