[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJaTeTpPxmFKa4D-NOXvuoL52esaouT-tkCupZm86nR1ZFVfxA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:43:35 +0200
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Steve Glendinning <steve.glendinning@...c.com>,
Mathieu Poirer <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
Robert Marklund <robert.marklund@...ricsson.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v3] net/smsc911x: Add regulator support
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 23:42, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:59:14PM +0200, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> i saw that !CONFIG_REGULATOR works great. my concern is that these
>> boards don't define any regulators for smsc resources, so if
>> CONFIG_REGULATOR is enabled to test out unrelated daughter cards, i
>> don't want the network driver suddenly failing. Linus' comments
>> suggest that this is what would happen unless each board file has its
>> smsc platform resources extended. maybe i misunderstood what he was saying ?
>
> That's the case that's handled by CONFIG_REGULATOR_DUMMY - if the lookup
> fails the core will provide a virtual regulator to the consumer. If
> you're running a setup like that you probably want to enable dummy
> regulators anyway.
ok, if people configuring need only select that Kconfig symbol to make
it work, i'm fine with things. thanks for the explanation.
-mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists