[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140602095112.GV5099@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 10:51:12 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arvind Chauhan <arvind.chauhan@....com>,
Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulators: Add definition of
regulator_set_voltage_time() for !CONFIG_REGULATOR
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:50:59PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 28 May 2014 23:08, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Whatever - I don't think the particular code makes any practical
> > difference. We would need to audit existing users who don't have a
> > REGULATOR dependency for breakage though.
> I tried auditing all 29 files which had this symbol: regulator_set_voltage
> and couldn't find anything which might break with the proposed change.
> Either these are making sure that we have a valid regulator or they have
> code inside #ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR ..
When you say they check for a valid regulator how are they doing that?
The stub will come into play if there isn't a dependency on REGULATOR.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists