linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/7] regulator: devres: add APIs for reference supplies

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]

Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:17:52 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Support Opensource <support.opensource@...semi.com>,
	Cosmin Tanislav <cosmin.tanislav@...log.com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Antoniu Miclaus <antoniu.miclaus@...log.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-input@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/7] regulator: devres: add APIs for reference
 supplies

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 06:18:32PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 11:03:23AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> 
> > So because we decided that we could not have devm_regulator_enable()
> > because of (IMO) contrived example of someone totally mixing up the devm
> > and non-devm APIs we now have to make more and more devm- variants
> > simply because we do not have access to the regulator structure with
> > devm_regulator_get_enable() and so all normal APIs are not available.
> 
> I don't follow what you're saying here?  What normal APIs are not
> available?  AFAICT this has nothing to do with a devm enable, it's a
> combined operation which reports the voltage for the regulator if one is
> available which would still be being added even if it used a devm
> enable.

You can not do devm_regulator_get_enable() and then call
regulator_get_voltage(), you need a new combined API.

> 
> > This is quite bad honestly. Mark, could we please reverse this
> > shortsighted decision and have normal devm_regulator_enable() operating
> > on a regulator?
> 
> Nothing has changed here.

Yes, unfortunately. We could have:

	reg = devm_regulator_get(...);
	...
	err = devm_regulator_enable(dev, reg);
	...
	err = regulator_get_voltage(reg);

and not multiply APIs, but we do not have devm_regulator_enable().

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry