linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] regulator: qcom_smd: Add PM6125 regulator support

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:   Fri, 3 Sep 2021 22:49:52 +0300
From:   Iskren Chernev <iskren.chernev@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        phone-devel@...r.kernel.org, ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] regulator: qcom_smd: Add PM6125 regulator support



On 9/3/21 6:23 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 02:56:54PM +0300, Iskren Chernev wrote:
> 
>> NOTE: The sources haven't been determined, so currently each regulator
>> has it's own source.
> 
> It would probably be safer to just leave them unspecified for now and
> then add them as people figure out what's going on rather than putting
> something incorrect into the DT bindings.

I didn't expect this patch to be mergeable, so I didn't add the dt-bindings.

So should I add bindings and just ignore all the sources (add them later)?

Regards,
Iskren