From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 12:28:27 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] mmci: supply per-instance regulator name
In-Reply-To: <20101202120318.GB3182@sirena.org.uk>
References: <1291289707-5529-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@stericsson.com>
	<20101202120318.GB3182@sirena.org.uk>
Message-ID: <20101202122827.GG29347@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 12:03:18PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 12:35:07PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On the Ux500 we have different regulators to different card slots
> > and eMMCs, and some have no regulator. Move the hardcoded "vmmc"
> > regulator name to platform data and supply it that way for the
> 
> You should never be passing regulator names through platform data, this
> appears to be broken.  You should be using the struct device to
> distingish between multiple instances and using whatever the actual
> supply names are for multiple supplies on the same device.
> 
> Looking at this without seeing the datasheet I'd expect these would end
> up as vmmcn for suitable values of n.

The way the MMCI code is, it only requests one regulator per AMBA
device, and therefore only one regulator per struct device.  So I
don't think the current code needs changing in any way provided the
struct device is used to find the corresponding regulator.