linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] regulator: add 88pm88x regulators driver

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: <ZZrCmykT2eY3+6Uh@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2024 15:26:19 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Karel Balej <karelb@...li.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
Cc: Karel Balej <balejk@...fyz.cz>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Duje Mihanović <duje.mihanovic@...le.hr>,
	~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] regulator: add 88pm88x regulators driver

On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 10:49:20AM +0100, Karel Balej wrote:
> On Fri Jan 5, 2024 at 4:18 PM CET, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Why are we adding an of_compatible here?  It's redundant, the MFD split
> > is a feature of Linux internals not of the hardware, and the existing
> > 88pm8xx MFD doesn't use them.

> in a feedback to my MFD series, Rob Herring pointed out that there is no
> need to have a devicetree node for a subdevice if it only contains
> "compatible" as the MFD driver can instantiate subdevices itself. I
> understood that this is what he was referring to, but now I suspect that
> it is sufficient for the mfd_cell.name to be set to the subdevice driver
> name for this - is that correct?

That's what I'd expect, yes.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)