From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] regulator: of: Parse ena-gpios property from DTS Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 18:45:44 +0000 Message-ID: <20141127184544.GD7712@sirena.org.uk> References: <1417087253-12306-1-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com> <1417087253-12306-4-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RtgGjXQ2kxhQeAcX" Return-path: Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:41165 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750861AbaK0SqC (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2014 13:46:02 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1417087253-12306-4-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Lee Jones , Liam Girdwood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Kukjin Kim , Kyungmin Park , Marek Szyprowski , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz --RtgGjXQ2kxhQeAcX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:20:49PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > + constraints->ena_gpio = of_get_named_gpio_flags(np, "ena-gpios", 0, > + &gpio_flags); > + if (gpio_is_valid(constraints->ena_gpio)) { No, this isn't sensible - in what way would an enable control GPIO be a constraint? The whole reason we have separate constraint and config structures is that these are different things. Keep the GPIO setup in the configuration. --RtgGjXQ2kxhQeAcX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUd3FXAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQQJEH/R1aQvgsi1/2ZrlcnqxUo59H UoTLEbE51P0zusADbV9oHGuwNfBfXMdi/yd6tfisgWYsd2XDbziq9DZyOmUyqymE 8wgiPqzxCKL0FPFatJQJ06XhVrc5nhjzbvi1TM3T2cIplhGRjkx9PHPUPVWxjyTY bWcBXOhCmUN+kW1PvpV24+OFMqOLOM8NBwcFHpZpBSkP+N4uYIBw39ErqRLgd5ec nYUMTYLw5JskSyiTjAI9srpVYcsAIM/0fyUBcxU/+xJwY0tqw5ELJw3jvW79qNkB 5QD/k/jlNRGeogvszq6Sur7d8Vh7BtptXUZXpYgcrVHzJaEWLz3/JlgWyhvVviQ= =3zNe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --RtgGjXQ2kxhQeAcX-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@kernel.org (Mark Brown) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 18:45:44 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v4 3/7] regulator: of: Parse ena-gpios property from DTS In-Reply-To: <1417087253-12306-4-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com> References: <1417087253-12306-1-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com> <1417087253-12306-4-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com> Message-ID: <20141127184544.GD7712@sirena.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:20:49PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > + constraints->ena_gpio = of_get_named_gpio_flags(np, "ena-gpios", 0, > + &gpio_flags); > + if (gpio_is_valid(constraints->ena_gpio)) { No, this isn't sensible - in what way would an enable control GPIO be a constraint? The whole reason we have separate constraint and config structures is that these are different things. Keep the GPIO setup in the configuration. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 473 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: