linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] hwmon: (pmbus/lm25066) Use PMBUS_REGULATOR

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: <eb3254fe-8419-4ef3-84ec-0ac37284b95e@roeck-us.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 16:12:18 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Zev Weiss <zev@...ilderbeest.net>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
 Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Patrick Rudolph <patrick.rudolph@...ements.com>,
 Peter Yin <peteryin.openbmc@...il.com>,
 Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tq-group.com>,
 linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Naresh Solanki <naresh.solanki@...ements.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] hwmon: (pmbus/lm25066) Use PMBUS_REGULATOR_ONE to
 declare regulator

On 2/23/24 15:26, Zev Weiss wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 03:16:28PM PST, Zev Weiss wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 08:21:08AM PST, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
>>>
>>> If a chip only provides a single regulator, it should be named 'vout'
>>> and not 'vout0'. Declare regulator using PMBUS_REGULATOR_ONE() to make
>>> that happen.
>>>
> 
> 
>>
>> Given (AFAICT) the >lack of any combined dts & driver patches anywhere in the kernel git history I guess maybe doing both atomically in a single commit might not be considered kosher, but could it at least be included in the same patch series?
>>
> 
> Ah, except I realize now I neglected to pass '--full-diff' to 'git log' when checking that, and after fixing that I see there is in fact some precedent for commits changing device-trees and driver code together, so ideally that would be my preference here too.
> 

That is not going to happen in the hwmon subsystem unless something slips by.
In a large project like the Linux kernel you'll find precedents for everything,
so citing one is not a valid argument.

As a general rule, I don't apply patches in .dts[i] files through the hwmon
branch at all, not even as part of a patch series. Architecture maintainers
tend to strongly oppose that idea, for the simple reason that it creates
the risk of merge conflicts and thus of bugs during commit windows.

Guenter