linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: dt: tegra: cardhu: register core regulator tps65911

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: <4FBBDE06.5080806@nvidia.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 May 2012 00:12:14 +0530
From:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
CC:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	"olof@...om.net" <olof@...om.net>,
	"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: dt: tegra: cardhu: register core regulator tps65911

On Tuesday 22 May 2012 11:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 05/22/2012 11:56 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> On Tuesday 22 May 2012 10:49 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 05/22/2012 11:09 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday 22 May 2012 10:10 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>>>> On 05/22/2012 07:05 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>>>>> Add device info for the PMIC device tps65911 in tegra-cardhu
>>>>>> dts file. This device supports the multiple regulator rails,
>>>>>> gpio, interrupts.
> ...
>>>>> Nitpicky, but the labels might be more logical as reg_vdd1 rather than
>>>>> vdd1_reg, but not a big deal.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, please replace the line above with:
>>>>>
>>>>>       reg_vdd1: regulator@0 {
>>>>>           reg =<0>;
>>>> Why do we really require the reg at all?
>>>> I dont think any usage of doing this.
> Oh, perhaps you meant the reg property not "reg_" in the label name?
>
> It is required because the parent node has #address-cells and
> #size-cells and because the node name itself has a unit address ("@nnn").
>

But we can not put
     reg_vdd1:regulator@0 {
         ::::::::::::::
     }


due to their dt binding with their node names.
In this case still do we need  reg=<0> and #address-cells and #size-cells?

--
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/