linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: Pinefeat cef168 lens control board

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: <20250818192915.11553-1-support@pinefeat.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 20:29:15 +0100
From: Aliaksandr Smirnou <support@...efeat.co.uk>
To: conor@...nel.org
Cc: conor+dt@...nel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	krzk+dt@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
	mchehab@...nel.org,
	robh@...nel.org,
	support@...efeat.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: Pinefeat cef168 lens control board

On Mon, 18 Aug 2025 18:36:50 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> Wut? This doesn't make sense, you have supplies so they should be
> documented. The fact that they're shared with a bunch of other things on
> the SBC you're aiming the product at doesn't matter. What if someone
> doesn't use this sensor with an RPi and there is a dedicated regulator?

The supply was introduced in the second patch version but later removed
following feedback from another maintainer. I’m fine with adding it back
if needed - I just want to make sure we’re consistent.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/c1b848b9-b1da-4976-9838-d474394a0992@kernel.org/

Would you prefer it described as before?

> Is that actually your email address?

will change to a named one

> Don't mention drivers in bindings, how linux handles things is not
relevant to a hardware description.

will remove driver mention