linux-kernel - Re: [RFT] [PATCH] regulator: tps65219: Fix .bypass_val

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, 09 Sep 2022 23:56:59 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jerome Neanne <jneanne@...libre.com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFT] [PATCH] regulator: tps65219: Fix .bypass_val_on setting

On Sun, 28 Aug 2022 20:01:53 +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> The .bypass_val_on setting does not match the .bypass_mask setting, so the
> .bypass_mask bit will never get set.  Fix it by removing .bypass_val_on
> setting, the regulator_set_bypass_regmap and regulator_get_bypass_regmap
> helpers will use rdev->desc->bypass_mask as val_on if the val_on is 0.
> 
> 

Applied to

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

Thanks!

[1/1] regulator: tps65219: Fix .bypass_val_on setting
      commit: 69a673c9e54d952cf404f80169d3100b7a9645bb

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