[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <576A67D9.6080707@ti.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:56:33 +0530
From: Keerthy <a0393675@...com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>, <tony@...mide.com>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <t-kristo@...com>,
<russ.dill@...com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
<linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] regulator: tps65217: Enable suspend configuration
On Wednesday 22 June 2016 03:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 03:44:02PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>
>> Hence saving it in a static array and using it later in the ops functions to
>> disable or enable regulator during suspend.
>
> Why a static array and not part of the dynamically allocated driver
> data?
Okay. That can be done.
I can introduce another integer pointer to struct tps65217 which
currently holds the driver data.
I will allocate memory for TPS65217_NUM_REGULATOR strobes during
regulator probe. Is this approach okay?
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists