From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kgene.kim@samsung.com (Kukjin Kim) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 10:47:40 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: S3C64XX: Hook up VDDINT on Cragganmore In-Reply-To: <20111206102732.GE28840@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1323105817-5638-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20111206102732.GE28840@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <04ca01ccb54b$5ed1e390$1c75aab0$%kim@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 08:21:30AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote: > > > > + REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vddint", NULL), > > > Now there's mixed usage for vddint. until s5pc110 it uses the 'vddint' > > but after exynos it uses the 'vdd_int'. either is okay but need to use > > the same name for consistency? > > > How do you think? > > I don't really care either way. I called it vddint because the existing > s3c64xx ARM core supply is called vddarm by software so I was also going > for consistency here :) . If we want to ensure consistency we should > just pick something and move to it, though I don't know if it's really > worth the effort. Yes, I think so. If required, let's move it later. Looks ok to me, will apply. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.