linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iio:adc:twl6030: Enable measurements of VUSB, VBAT and others

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]

Date:   Sun, 11 Dec 2022 11:53:58 +0000
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To:     Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
Cc:     lars@...afoo.de, jiasheng@...as.ac.cn, paul@...pouillou.net,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio:adc:twl6030: Enable measurements of VUSB, VBAT and
 others

On Sun, 4 Dec 2022 21:27:51 +0100
Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info> wrote:

> On Sun, 4 Dec 2022 15:41:52 +0000
> Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu,  1 Dec 2022 19:16:35 +0100
> > Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info> wrote:
> >   
> > > Some inputs need to be wired up to produce proper measurements,
> > > without this change only near zero values are reported.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>    
> > 
> > Sounds like a fix to me.  If so, Fixes tag?  
> 
> seems to be there since the beginning, to it would be
> Fixes: 1696f36482e70 ("iio: twl6030-gpadc: TWL6030, TWL6032 GPADC driver")
> 
> I think it was just not used with the charger (which is not in mainline yet),
> so it was probably ignored.
Makes sense.  I've applied it at marked it for stable on basis it wants the
fixes tag and would get picked up anyway + appears unlikely to have bad side effects.
> 
> > 
> > Anything in here we should be turning off again if the driver is removed 
> > or toggling on suspend? If not, other than the space below this looks fine to me.
> >   
> I would consider that as configuration, comparing with the nearest relative twl4030,
> there a similar bit is set in the probe() without disabling it in the remove().
> 
> But I think we should set TWL6030_GPADCR in remove() as we do in suspend(),
> but that is another fix.

There are always more fixes :)

Jonathan

> 
> Regards,
> Andreas