[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111019144959.GA31850@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:50:00 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>
Cc: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...com>, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
patches@...aro.org, tony@...mide.com,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, lrg@...com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] regulator: helper routine to extract
regulator_init_data
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:42:16PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
*Please* delete irrelevant quotes from mails.
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 05:05:56PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> > Yes, it seems like a good idea given that most drivers seem to blindly
> > pass the regulator_init_data onto regulator_register, however there
> > are cases like the twl regulator driver which seems to peek into the
> > constraints passed from the board to make sure it drops anything that
> > the hardware does not support,
> I'm not sure why twl works in that way. Is it a sign that those
> configuration peeked by twl regulator driver should be encoded in twl
> regulator driver itself instead of being passed from the board? Or
> why the board does not pass something matching driver/hardware
> capability to save that peek?
It's completely unneeded but harmless, it's there because there were a
large number of discussions going on with the original author and it was
easier to merge the code.
--
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