[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 23:52:09 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] regulator: qcom: Rework to single platform device
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 02:32:35PM -0800, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue 03 Mar 14:09 PST 2015, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > How does this work for the case where we may not want to add all the
> > regulators that a PMIC supports. I'm mostly thinking about the case
> > where we want to use the pm8xxx-regulator driver for a few regulators
> > and so we omit them from the DT for the RPM regulators.
> An empty or non-existing regulator of_node will still be registered, but
> without REGULATOR_CHANGE_STATUS nor REGULATOR_CHANGE_VOLTAGE; so any
> operation on this regulator will fail with an -EPERM.
...but of course we'd never try any operations on it anyway as there
would be no consumers.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists