linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Use PROBE_FORCE

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: <167958680964.69791.4288005839640736438.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 2023 15:53:29 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Cc:     lgirdwood@...il.com, dianders@...omium.org,
        patches@...nsource.cirrus.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Use
 PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 13:20:46 +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> Restore synchronous probing for Arizona regulators because otherwise
> the main MFD driver will not find its core supplies.
> 
> As these regulators are built into the CODEC and typically have no DT
> representation the regulator framework is unaware of their existence
> until the driver probes. These means the probing of the driver needs to
> be synchronous to ensure the regulators are not substitued for the dummy
> later when the users request them.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

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

Thanks!

[1/2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS
      commit: 557de8d84ae4988b08339032d2f405ef5057e82b
[2/2] regulator: arizona-micsupp: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS
      commit: b65a0a8edba2c0a03e8fdb03b6807132e4166483

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