[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANMq1KC_-g45wdGgGiBmEyVXAJMkKwsJBJXGBHOMJk_=NyfpYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 11:37:14 +0700
From: Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>,
Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa.rosenzweig@...labora.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Devicetree List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] drm/panfrost: Add support for multiple regulators
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:16 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 03:15:59PM +0800, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
>
> > - I couldn't find a way to detect the number of regulators in the
> > device tree, if we wanted to refuse to probe the device if there
> > are too many regulators, which might be required for safety, see
> > the thread on v2 [1].
>
> You'd need to enumerate all the properties of the device and look
> for things matching *-supply.
I see ,-) I was hoping for something slightly cleaner, or maybe an
existing function in the core.
Steven: How strongly do you feel about this? If so I can add that
check in the next revision.
Also, just a heads-up, I'm out for the next 2 weeks, I'll send v4 after that.
>
> Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists