From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
Cc: "lrg@ti.com" <lrg@ti.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: use correct device for device supply lookup
Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 18:28:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120519172842.GW4039@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FB7D4D8.2050501@nvidia.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1193 bytes --]
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:44:00PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> On Saturday 19 May 2012 10:11 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 07:44:06PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> >>When registering the regulator driver, use the rdev->dev for
> >>getting the regulator device of given supply instead of parent
> >>device.
> >You're providing no motivation for this and it's difficult to see how it
> >improves things. The class device is dynamically numbered so it's not
> >suitable for specifying supplies on a non-DT system and for a DT system
> >it's not obvious to me that we would want to involve the class device in
> >anything, it requires an additional layer of indirection but that's
> >about it.
> If I dont do this then it will not enter in the following case for
> getting the regulator_dev of supply regulator because dev->of_node
> is null, the tps65910-regulator driver have not set the
> pdev->dev.ofnode.
But why, why should it do that and how is this related to your patch?
You're *really* not explaining anything clearly with what you're doing
with device tree... it's not clear what you're trying to do here or
that you've understood what's there currently.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-19 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-19 14:14 [PATCH] regulator: core: use correct device for device supply lookup Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 16:41 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 17:14 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 17:20 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 17:40 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 17:56 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 18:26 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 19:03 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 20:50 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 21:13 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 23:13 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-20 7:34 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-20 9:01 ` Mark Brown
[not found] ` <4FB8C9EF.7010400@nvidia.com>
2012-05-20 12:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-20 12:14 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-20 12:10 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 17:28 ` Mark Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120519172842.GW4039@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.