[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120704105838.GM4111@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 11:58:39 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
Cc: "lrg@...com" <lrg@...com>,
"grant.likely@...retlab.ca" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
"rob@...dley.net" <rob@...dley.net>,
"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org"
<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] regulator: fixed: dt: support for input supply
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 04:12:53PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 July 2012 03:51 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 12:32:08PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> >>In non-DT, the input supply is passed with the regulator_init_data
> >>through the fixed voltage config and it is filled in board files.
> >No, this is a legacy way of doing things. All regulators should be
> >moving to specifying the name in their descriptor except for supplies
> >that are power roots (which are often fixed voltage regulators).
> Then the input_supply should be set through the regulator init data
> "init_data->supply_regulator" rather than the desc? If yes then also
> I need to change the forthcoming patch for tps65910 and tps6586x to
> pass the supply_regulator through init_data.
No, exactly the opposite way round - it should be being set in the
descriptor. The issue with your patch was that it only allowed DT
systems to do this.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists