From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Correct registration of multiple gpmc smsc911x devices. Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:41:33 -0700 Message-ID: <20120321194133.GP9859@atomide.com> References: <4F6324D5.9010106@uni-dortmund.de> <1332352554-6417-1-git-send-email-Russ.Dill@ti.com> <20120321181259.GJ3226@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120321183957.GM9859@atomide.com> <20120321190028.GK3226@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120321193046.GN9859@atomide.com> <20120321193839.GM3226@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:60859 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750745Ab2CUTli (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Mar 2012 15:41:38 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120321193839.GM3226@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: "Porter, Matt" , "Dill, Russ" , "" , "" , "" * Mark Brown [120321 12:41]: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:30:47PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Mark Brown [120321 12:03]: > > > > That should be changed to pass in a boolean flag rather than a pointer > > > to platform device - the board may not have direct access to the > > > relevant regulator (eg, if it's part of a MFD) or the regulator may be > > > on another bus like I2C (for simpler regulator only devices). > > > Hmm I see. This means that we need to patch some board files anyways > > for the boolean flag to use the fixed regulator. This is because for > > some cases vddvario and vdd33a regulators can come from the mfd/tps/twl > > chip and it's unsafe to assume that gpmc-smsc911x.c can set up these > > regulators automatically. Passing a boolean flag to not set up the > > default regulator would work too, but we'd rather eventually see > > the real board specific regulators being patched in. > > Yes, ideally the boards would do everything and gpmc-smsc911x.c should > be able to completely ignore regulators. OK, great, let's do that then. > > So if that's the case, we might as well patch the board files > > to add the fixed regulators for each one and drop all the regulator > > code from gpmc-smsc911x.c. > > That's my preferred option, hopefully with the helpers we have for > regulator registration we shouldn't need to add device specific helpers. Russ, care to update your patch accordingly? Those helpers are queued in linux-next. Regards, Tony