From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] mfd: Fix runtime warning caused by duplicate device registration
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 13:45:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120705124549.GD4111@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FF58B68.5000703@linaro.org>
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 01:41:12PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On 05/07/12 13:29, Mark Brown wrote:
> If DT is _not_ enabled, we do:
> From platform code:
> - Register the DB8500-PRCMU
> - Register the AB8500
> So you see the registration is separate.
Right, so what I'm saying is that what I'd expect unless there's
something unusual going on is that you wouldn't be doing the separate
registration of the AB8500 here and would instead be passing the
platform data for the AB8500 through in the same way you pass the DT
data through.
DT and non-DT do have a very similar model for this stuff.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120705/3cfff40b/attachment.sig>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linus.walleij@stericsson.com,
arnd@arndb.de, sameo@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mfd: Fix runtime warning caused by duplicate device registration
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 13:45:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120705124549.GD4111@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FF58B68.5000703@linaro.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 605 bytes --]
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 01:41:12PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On 05/07/12 13:29, Mark Brown wrote:
> If DT is _not_ enabled, we do:
> From platform code:
> - Register the DB8500-PRCMU
> - Register the AB8500
> So you see the registration is separate.
Right, so what I'm saying is that what I'd expect unless there's
something unusual going on is that you wouldn't be doing the separate
registration of the AB8500 here and would instead be passing the
platform data for the AB8500 through in the same way you pass the DT
data through.
DT and non-DT do have a very similar model for this stuff.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-05 12:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-03 11:59 [PATCH 1/1] mfd: Fix runtime warning caused by duplicate device registration Lee Jones
2012-07-03 11:59 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 12:35 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 12:35 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 13:07 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 13:07 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 13:24 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 13:24 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 13:48 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 13:48 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 14:21 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 14:21 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 7:36 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 7:36 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 9:45 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 9:45 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 11:46 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 11:46 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:15 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:15 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:29 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:29 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:41 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:41 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:45 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2012-07-05 12:45 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:55 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:55 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:03 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:03 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:12 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:12 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:20 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:20 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:54 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:54 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Samuel Ortiz
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Samuel Ortiz
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 14:04 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:04 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 14:13 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:13 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:35 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 14:35 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 15:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 15:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 15:51 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 15:51 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 14:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-03 14:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-03 14:43 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 14:43 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 7:33 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 7:33 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2012-07-05 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2012-07-05 13:13 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:13 ` Lee Jones
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=20120705124549.GD4111@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.