Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1319033
| From | Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] regulator: mt6323: Add support for MT6323 regulator |
| Date | 2016-01-27 15:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qVzzY-4VL-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qVx59-3fC-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qVx59-3fC-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 01:00:59PM +0100, John Crispin wrote: > + /* Constrain board-specific capabilities according to what > + * this driver and the chip itself can actually do. > + */ > + c = rdev->constraints; > + c->valid_modes_mask |= REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL | > + REGULATOR_MODE_STANDBY; > + c->valid_ops_mask |= REGULATOR_CHANGE_MODE; No, drivers should *never* enable things that weren't explictly enabled by the machine constraints. This misses the whole point of having constraints. They are there so that the system integrator can enable the functionality that is safe on a given board. The comment is also inaccurate, it claims it's imposing constraints but in fact it's adding additional permissions.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH V4 2/2] regulator: mt6323: Add support for MT6323 regulator John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org> - 2016-01-27 13:10 +0100 Re: [PATCH V4 2/2] regulator: mt6323: Add support for MT6323 regulator Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-01-27 15:50 +0100
csiph-web