linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] regulator: Add refactored mtk-dvfsrc-regulator 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]

Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:53:02 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc: amergnat@...libre.com, broonie@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, djakov@...nel.org, gustavoars@...nel.org,
 henryc.chen@...iatek.com, keescook@...omium.org, kernel@...labora.com,
 krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, lgirdwood@...il.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
 matthias.bgg@...il.com, robh@...nel.org, wenst@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] regulator: Add refactored mtk-dvfsrc-regulator
 driver

Il 24/04/24 12:35, Christophe JAILLET ha scritto:
> Le 24/04/2024 à 11:54, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno a écrit :
>> The previous driver never worked, and never got even compiled because
>> it was missing the DVFSRC driver entirely, including needed neaders.
>>
>> This is a full (or nearly full) refactoring of the MediaTek DVFSRC
>> controlled Regulators driver, retaining support for the MT6873, MT8183
>> and MT8192 SoC, and adding MT8195.
>>
>> As part of the refactoring, this driver is now probed using its own
>> devicetree compatible, as this is a child of the main DVFSRC driver
>> and gets probed as a subnode of that.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@...lic.gmane.org>
>> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
>> <angelogioacchino.delregno-ZGY8ohtN/8qB+jHODAdFcQ@...lic.gmane.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/regulator/mtk-dvfsrc-regulator.c | 196 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 196 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 drivers/regulator/mtk-dvfsrc-regulator.c
>>
> 
> ...
> 
>> +static int dvfsrc_vcore_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +    struct regulator_config config = { .dev = &pdev->dev };
>> +    const struct dvfsrc_regulator_pdata *pdata;
>> +    int i;
>> +
>> +    pdata = device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
>> +    if (!pdata)
>> +        return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +    for (i = 0; i < pdata->size; i++) {
>> +        struct regulator_desc *vrdesc = &pdata->descs[i];
>> +        struct regulator_dev *rdev;
>> +
>> +        rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, vrdesc, &config);
>> +        if (IS_ERR(rdev)) {
>> +            dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register %s\n", vrdesc->name);
>> +            return PTR_ERR(rdev);
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Nit: (in case of v6)
> 
>      dev_err_probe()?
> 

I don't think there's going to be any v6, as there's nothing else to do on
this series.

Mark, if you want to fix this up before applying, that should then be, exactly

		rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, vrdesc, &config);
		if (IS_ERR(rdev))
			dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, PTR_ERR(rdev),
				      "failed to register %s\n", vrdesc->name);

Otherwise, nevermind I guess..?

Cheers,
Angelo