linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] mfd: bcm590xx: Add support for interrupt handling

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: <2153fb6d-17d3-4cec-b348-894599743b93@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2026 21:23:36 +0100
From: Artur Weber <aweber.kernel@...il.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
 ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
 Stanislav Jakubek <stano.jakubek@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mfd: bcm590xx: Add support for interrupt handling

Sorry for the late reply to a 3-month-old review, but I missed this comment:

On 23.10.2025 15:03, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2025, Artur Weber wrote:
>>   
>> +static bool bcm590xx_volatile_pri(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
> 
> If I've asked a question or showed uncertainty about something, it
> usually means that changes need to be made.  Asking what "pri" meant
> wasn't a one time thing.  It shows that something is not clear and if
> I'm asking, others will wonder too.
> 
> Can we change 'sec' to 'secondary' and 'pri' to 'primary' please? 

That function was named for consistency with the other uses of "pri" and
"sec" in the code; this function is passed to a field in the struct
"bcm590xx_regmap_config_pri".

(Admittedly, "bcm590xx_regmap_volatile_pri" would be a more accurate
function name.)

I understand that the pri/sec naming could be confusing though. Should I
update the entire driver to use primary/secondary instead, or just this
one function? Or just the regmap_config?

The regmap_pri and regmap_sec names are also used in the bcm590xx struct
which is passed to other drivers (currently only the regulator driver),
changing those would also involve changing that driver, but that's fine
by me.

Best regards
Artur