[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1274134636.2698.170.camel@finisterre.wolfsonmicro.main>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 15:17:16 -0700
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Linus WALLEIJ <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
Cc: Sundar R IYER <sundar.iyer@...ricsson.com>,
Deepak Sikri <deepak.sikri79@...il.com>,
Viresh KUMAR <viresh.kumar@...com>,
Rajeev KUMAR <rajeev-dlh.kumar@...com>,
Armando VISCONTI <armando.visconti@...com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Vipin KUMAR <vipin.kumar@...com>,
Shiraz HASHIM <shiraz.hashim@...com>,
"linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
STEricsson_nomadik_linux <STEricsson_nomadik_linux@...t.st.com>
Subject: RE: [linux-pm] Power Domain Framework
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 23:46 +0200, Linus WALLEIJ wrote:
> [Mark]
> > I do agree that separating out the common bits of power
> > domain implementation would be good, my concerns here are around the
> > level of integration with the regulator API.
> The plenty talk about power domains in
> Documentation/power/regulators/overview.txt
> was what got us started in this regulator direction from the
> beginning.
Yeah, sure - obviously, the generic concept of power domains is
something that does exist within the off-SoC hardware, but on-SoC the
end implementation is a bit different.
--
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