[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56a6dc27-35ef-68a9-e990-7d989450ba89@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 12:19:11 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: LABBE Corentin <clabbe@...libre.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
calvin.johnson@....nxp.com, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, hkallweit1@...il.com,
jernej.skrabec@...il.com, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
kuba@...nel.org, lgirdwood@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk,
pabeni@...hat.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, samuel@...lland.org,
wens@...e.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] dt-bindings: net: Add documentation for optional
regulators
On 20/05/2022 10:15, LABBE Corentin wrote:
>
> I agree that supplies and supply-names are better.
> But in another answer Rob is against it, so if I understand well, we are stuck to use individual xxx-supply.
> I will try to create a new regulator_get_bulk_all() which scan all properties matching xxx-supply
Yep.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists