[PATCH 4/4] regulator: add max8925 support

Liam Girdwood
2010-01-04T15:47:18Z

On Fri, 2009-12-25 at 00:27 -0500, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Mark Brown
> <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 04:39:59AM -0500, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> >
> >> +#define MAX8925_REGULATOR_DRIVER(_name) \
> >> +{ \
> >> + .driver = { \
> >> + .name = "max8925-" #_name, \
> >> + .owner = THIS_MODULE, \
> >> + }, \
> >> + .probe = max8925_regulator_probe, \
> >> + .remove = __devexit_p(max8925_regulator_remove),\
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static struct platform_driver max8925_regulator_driver[] = {
> >> + MAX8925_REGULATOR_DRIVER(sd1),
> >> + MAX8925_REGULATOR_DRIVER(sd2),
> >> + MAX8925_REGULATOR_DRIVER(sd3),
> >> + MAX8925_REGULATOR_DRIVER(ldo1),
> >> + MAX8925_REGULATOR_DRIVER(ldo2),
> >
> > Since these driver structures differ only in name there seems to be no
> > need to define more than one for the bucks and one for the LDOs - the
> > code in the driver doesn't actually seem to need it. The .id field of
> > the driver structure can be set to give the device numbers.
> >
> >> +}
> >> +module_init(max8925_regulator_init);
> >
> > subsys_initcall()
> >
> >> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> >> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@marvell.com>");
> >> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Regulator Driver for Maxim 8925 PMIC");
> >> +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:max8925-regulator");
> >
> > This MODULE_ALIAS won't actually work - the name doesn't match up with
> > the names of the drivers or the devices.
> >
>
> Updated the serie of patches.

I'm fine with this now but it doesn't apply against voltage for-next.
Could you recreate against for-next.

Btw, what is the status of the other PMIC regulator patch you have.
Iirc, it was waiting on some PMIC core change in it's mfd driver ?

Thanks

Liam