linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 4/6] regulator: Add a regulator driver for the PM8008 PMIC

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d86e1a33-e7cf-58f7-d75b-23a0313ebde5@quicinc.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Dec 2021 20:13:57 +0530
From:   "Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp)" <quic_c_skakit@...cinc.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        <collinsd@...eaurora.org>, <subbaram@...eaurora.org>,
        Das Srinagesh <gurus@...eaurora.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Lee Jones" <lee.jones@...aro.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 4/6] regulator: Add a regulator driver for the PM8008
 PMIC


On 11/25/2021 9:15 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 03:12:31PM +0530, Satya Priya wrote:
>
>> +	for (reg = &reg_data[0]; reg->name; reg++) {
> Why is this not just iterating from 0 to ARRAY_SIZE() - that's the more
> normal way to write things and doesn't require a terminator on the
> array.


While changing some other things in the probe I made this change, but I 
think this is not necessary, I'll change it to iterate from 0 to 
ARRAY_SIZE()


>> +		child_node = of_get_child_by_name(parent_node, reg->name);
>> +		if (!child_node) {
>> +			dev_err(dev, "child node %s not found\n", reg->name);
>> +			return -ENODEV;
>> +		}
> This could be pulled out of the array.

Not sure what you meant here. could you elaborate a bit?


>    I think you're also missing an
> of_node_put() on the child_node.


I'll add it in the next version.


>> +		rc = of_property_read_u32(child_node, "reg", &base);
>> +		if (rc < 0) {
>> +			dev_err(dev, "%s: failed to get regulator base rc=%d\n",
>> +						reg->name, rc);
>> +			return rc;
>> +		}
> It's not clear to me why this in particular is being read out of the DT
> binding, I'd expect this to be in the array describing the regulator the
> same as everything else?

I thought that the base address would change with boards, but seems it 
doesn't change. I'll add this in the array.