linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] drivers: regulator: Add ADI MAX77541/MAX77540 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]

Message-ID: <Y9kJEsjkG8h79tcR@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2023 14:26:58 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Sahin, Okan" <Okan.Sahin@...log.com>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@...htek.com>,
        "Bolboaca, Ramona" <Ramona.Bolboaca@...log.com>,
        Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@...aro.org>,
        William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] drivers: regulator: Add ADI MAX77541/MAX77540
 Regulator Support

On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 09:27:48AM +0000, Sahin, Okan wrote:

First of all, please do avoid top-posting.

> Sorry for second question. I do not want to bother you, but I realized that I
> need to be sure about driver_data before sending new patch. You said that you
> need to use pointers directly for driver_data then I fixed that part in mfd,
> but I do not need or  use driver_data in regulator since chip_id comes from
> mfd device so I think using like below should be enough for my
> implementation.
> 
> static const struct platform_device_id max77541_regulator_platform_id[] = {
> 	{ "max77540-regulator", },
> 	{ "max77541-regulator", },
> 	{  /* sentinel */  }
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, max77541_regulator_platform_id);
> 
> static const struct of_device_id max77541_regulator_of_id[] = {
> 	{ .compatible = "adi,max77540-regulator", },
> 	{ .compatible = "adi,max77541-regulator", },
> 	{ /* sentinel */  }
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, max77541_regulator_of_id);
> 
> What do you think?

If you have got all necessary data from the upper layer, why do you need to
have an ID table here? I'm not sure I understand how this OF ID table works
in this case.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko