[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKew6eXafa0n+dUcqa3EXEJQj4xNDM_Z2UNVhGu7rCSSEgiieQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:27:51 +0530
From: Yadwinder Singh Brar <yadi.brar01@...il.com>
To: axel.lin@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>,
Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>,
Myungjoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Chiwoong Byun <woong.byun@...sung.com>,
Yadwinder Singh Brar <yadi.brar@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] regulator: max77686: Implement .set_ramp_delay() callback.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com> wrote:
>> static struct regulator_ops max77686_ops = {
>> .list_voltage = regulator_list_voltage_linear,
>> .map_voltage = regulator_map_voltage_linear,
>> @@ -90,6 +114,7 @@ static struct regulator_ops max77686_buck_dvs_ops = {
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> .get_voltage_sel = regulator_get_voltage_sel_regmap,
>> .set_voltage_sel = regulator_set_voltage_sel_regmap,
>> .set_voltage_time_sel = regulator_set_voltage_time_sel,
>> + .set_ramp_delay = max77686_set_ramp_delay,
>> };
>
> I think what you want here is to set .set_ramp_delay callback for
> max77686_buck_dvs_ops
> rather than max77686_ops.
Now I have seen into my code after applying this patch again, yes its
set for max77686_buck_dvs_ops.
I also missed to catch this in patch... :) ..
Anyways, thanks for review and I think, we don't need to revise this patch.
--
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