linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 21/21] regulator: s2mps11: enable-gpios is optional on s2mpg1x

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4e118863-885f-4858-a6c1-8f345cae4d7e@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2026 12:32:22 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>,
 Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>,
 Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>, Juan Yescas <jyescas@...gle.com>,
 kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 21/21] regulator: s2mps11: enable-gpios is optional on
 s2mpg1x

On 02/01/2026 12:26, André Draszik wrote:
> On Fri, 2026-01-02 at 11:19 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2025 at 1:24 PM André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> For s2mpg1x, enable-gpios is optional, but when not given, the driver
>>> is complaining quite verbosely about the missing property.
>>>
>>> Refactor the code slightly to avoid printing those messages to the
>>> kernel log in that case.
>>>
>>
>> I don't get the point of this - you added this function in the same
>> series, why can't it be done right the first time it's implemented?
> 
> Sure, I can merge this patch into the refactoring patch 15 - the intention
> was to have incremental changes to simplify review.

When you add new code which is already wrong and you need to fix it in
patch 21, it is not easier to review. Adding undesired code, which you
immediately change, is making things difficult to review.

Best regards,
Krzysztof