[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161213192712.gbaw4t4awayybnta@rob-hp-laptop>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 13:27:12 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
Patrick Titiano <ptitiano@...libre.com>,
Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] devicetree: power: add bindings for GPIO-driven
power switches
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 11:21:44PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> Some boards are equipped with simple, GPIO-driven power load switches.
> An example of such ICs is the TI tps229* series.
How is this different than a GPIO regulator? The input and output
voltages just happen to be the same. I could be convinced this is
different enough to have a different compatible, but it somewhat seems
you want to use this for IIO, so you are creating a different binding
for that usecase.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists