[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180307141027.GD7290@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:10:27 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Maciej Purski <m.purski@...sung.com>
Cc: Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: Regulator regression in next-20180305
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 01:57:12PM +0100, Maciej Purski wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out what is so special about these boards. The only
> strange thing, that I haven't noticed at first, is that all regulators share
> a common supply - dummy regulator. It is defined in anatop_regulator.c.
No, that's a regulator framework thing - the regulator framework will
use the dummy regulator as a supply when there's nothing described in
the DT so long as the client doesn't explicitly tell it that the supply
might be optional.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists