linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] regulator: adapt fixed regulator driver to dt

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOesGMh2_C+yx=_5PjqoKxZmAMvx-puRjq45s+G2kz2EaEEtqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 4 Nov 2011 14:47:05 -0700
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.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 v3 2/4] regulator: adapt fixed regulator driver to dt

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Mark Brown
<broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 02:18:24PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 09:01:52PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>> > No, the fixed voltage regultor is a superset of a general regulator - it
>> > has additional information like the voltage it supplies and the optional
>> > enable GPIO.
>
>> Still, seems like it could be merged into one regulator binding.
>
> I don't see how you can usefully do that, the task of plumbing a
> regulator into a board is largely orthogonal to the specific feature set
> of a given regulator.  The specific bindings for a fixed voltage
> regulator would be useful or unhelpful for most regultors controlled via
> I2C.

I meant more that the fixed regulators should reuse as much as
possible from the generic regulator bindings, instead of completely
forking them.

Then, depending on how they are controlled, there will be more
specific bindings. So the case of a gpio-controlled fixed regulator
would have a binding where the format of the properties to find the
gpio, etc, would be described. But things like voltage (without a
range, obviously) would be using the same bindings as the other
regulators.

Does that make more sense?


-Olof
--
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/