[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A437792.6040009@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:11:46 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC: Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Rapoport <mike@...pulab.co.il>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Allow consumer supplies to be set up with
dev_name()
Mark Brown wrote:
> Follow the approach suggested by Russell King and implemented by him in
> the clkdev API and allow consumer device supply mapings to be set up
> using the dev_name() for the consumer instead of the struct device.
> In order to avoid making existing machines instabuggy and creating merge
> issues the use of struct device is still supported for the time being.
>
> This resolves problems working with buses such as I2C which make the
> struct device available late providing that the final device name is
> known, which is the case for most embedded systems with fixed setups.
>
> Consumers must still use the struct device when calling regulator_get().
>
>
Hi,
This patch is an excellent solution to the problem.
I just wonder if we need to suggest subsystem maintainers make sure that
their
device names are suitably unique and identifiable? For example, i2c device
tend to have names like 0-0032. Perhaps we need something to identify
that they
are indeed i2c devices?
For that matter, is there anything other than blind luck preventing two
regulator
consumers having the same dev_name?
---
Jonathan Cameron
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists