[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1473505415.11323.235.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 14:03:35 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Regulator probe
On Fri, 2016-09-09 at 17:38 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 07:10:39PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-09-09 at 16:29 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> ...and then we correctly report that the optional supply that
> > > isn't
> > > mapped (as far as I remember) isn't there.
> But it *will be* soon there.
> Hmm... And the proper fix for this case is... (let's assume there
> > will
> > not be device tree solution in nearest future)?
>
> To supply this particular mapping before you set full constraints.
Please, correct me if I'm wrong in the following:
1) mapping is what kept in the regulator_map_list;
2) the only way to list something for this mapping is to use one of
regulator drivers that will call regulator_register() at the end;
3) in case of fixed voltage regulator it prepares configuration and
description (based on platform code for example) of the regulator and
calls devm_regulator_register();
4) regulator_register() _will not_ add fixed regulator to the mapping if
GPIO is deferred;
5) regulator_dev_lookup() didn't see the regulator before
deferred_probe_initcall() happened.
If the above is correct, how to add mapping to be seen in 5) ?
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists