From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
To: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Limit propagation of parent voltage count and list
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 13:38:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170324203818.GA33073@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170324200952.103303-1-mka@chromium.org>
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 01:09:52PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index 53d4fc70dbd0..121838e0125b 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -2487,6 +2487,10 @@ static int _regulator_list_voltage(struct regulator *regulator,
> if (lock)
> mutex_unlock(&rdev->mutex);
> } else if (rdev->supply) {
> + // Limit propagation of parent values to switch regulators
The kernel doesn't use C99 comments. Oddly enough, this isn't actually
in the coding style doc (Documentation/process/coding-style.rst), nor is
it caught by scripts/checkpatch.pl (even though it clearly has a 'C99
comment' rule).
> + if (ops->get_voltage || ops->get_voltage_sel)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> ret = _regulator_list_voltage(rdev->supply, selector, lock);
> } else {
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -2540,6 +2544,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(regulator_is_enabled);
> int regulator_count_voltages(struct regulator *regulator)
> {
> struct regulator_dev *rdev = regulator->rdev;
> + const struct regulator_ops *ops = rdev->desc->ops;
>
> if (rdev->desc->n_voltages)
> return rdev->desc->n_voltages;
> @@ -2547,6 +2552,10 @@ int regulator_count_voltages(struct regulator *regulator)
> if (!rdev->supply)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> + // Limit propagation of parent value to switch regulators
Same here.
> + if (ops->get_voltage || ops->get_voltage_sel || ops->list_voltage)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> return regulator_count_voltages(rdev->supply);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(regulator_count_voltages);
I'm not very familiar with this code, but judging by your problem
description in previous threads and by comparing with the logic in
_regulator_get_voltage() (for when to reference the ->supply), this
seems resonable. So:
Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
It's probably worth verifying that this doesn't break whatever Javier
was supporting in the first place, as a sanity check.
Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-24 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-24 20:09 [PATCH] regulator: core: Limit propagation of parent voltage count and list Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-03-24 20:38 ` Brian Norris [this message]
2017-03-25 5:05 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2017-03-27 10:21 ` Mark Brown
2017-03-27 17:39 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-03-27 17:54 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2017-03-27 18:13 ` Mark Brown
2017-03-27 18:20 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170324203818.GA33073@google.com \
--to=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=javier@osg.samsung.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mka@chromium.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox