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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210913143221.GG4283@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 13 Sep 2021 15:32:21 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Iskren Chernev <iskren.chernev@...il.com>
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 Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 10:49:52PM +0300, Iskren Chernev wrote:
> 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.

If you skip out on basic smell tests like having DT bindings that's
going to inhibit the amount of review you get, once things obviously
aren't going to be merged review tends to get a lot more high level.

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

Yes.

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