[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <331ABD5ECB02734CA317220B2BBEABC13EA29B8E@DBDE01.ent.ti.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 14:19:59 +0000
From: "AnilKumar, Chimata" <anilkumar@...com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC: "axel.lin@...il.com" <axel.lin@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Girdwood, Liam" <lrg@...com>, "Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@...com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH RFT] regulator: tps65217: Convert to
regulator_[is_enabled|get_voltage_sel]_regmap
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 18:15:14, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:39:38PM +0000, AnilKumar, Chimata wrote:
>
> > + if (config->regmap)
> > + rdev->regmap = config->regmap;
> > + else
> > + rdev->regmap = dev_get_regmap(dev->parent, NULL);
>
> No, this would be broken. We're specifically using the device we got
> passed in. In this case the fact that the regmap is on the MFD means
> that the driver does need to explicitly set the regmap. Or we should
> have this be a multi-stage series of checks:
>
> if (config->regmap)
> rdev->regmap = config->regmap;
> else if (dev_get_regmap(dev, NULL))
> rdev->regmap = dev_get_regmap(dev, NULL);
> else if (dev->parent)
> rdev->regmap = dev_get_regmap(dev->parent, NULL);
>
> which should cover the MFD case if there's no regmap on the child
> without having to go through all the drivers doing it by hand.
>
Mark,
Currently this is not properly taken care, is there are any specific
reasons for this?
Thanks
AnilKumar
--
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