From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com (Laurent Pinchart) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 15:44:56 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: gpio-regulator: Add required regulator-type property In-Reply-To: <20140513165921.GK12304@sirena.org.uk> References: <1385653493-9952-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> <2193707.R9XiqBsnU4@avalon> <20140513165921.GK12304@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: <1885616.D9TNdZVfuO@avalon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 13 May 2014 17:59:21 Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 02:06:23AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > What's the status of this ? The gpio regulator driver now defaults to > > voltage regulator when the regulator-type property is not set. Should the > > DT bindings document the property as optional (I can submit a patch for > > that), or do you consider that the gpio regulator driver should support > > voltage regulators only when used with DT, and just keep the > > regulator-type property support in the driver for backward compatibility > > ? > > I don't really care either way, I did write a patch for the bindings but > there was some language lawyering over it and I never cared enough to > get round to updating it. Could you please point me to the patch ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 490 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: