From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:01:10 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] regulator: twl6030: add support for vdd1, vdd2 and vdd3 regulators In-Reply-To: <1330091765.4102.547.camel@sokoban> References: <1329995109-4795-1-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <20120223153422.GF4553@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1330076289.4102.517.camel@sokoban> <20120224114940.GB5450@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1330089398.4102.539.camel@sokoban> <20120224132408.GF5450@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1330091765.4102.547.camel@sokoban> Message-ID: <20120224140109.GG5450@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 03:56:05PM +0200, Tero Kristo wrote: > So, do you want me to also change the num_voltages value for the > regulator from zero to be the same as max_uV, as we have this check > within regulator/core: > if (!ops->list_voltage || selector >= rdev->desc->n_voltages) > return -EINVAL; > This will also potentially make some code to iterate over regulator > voltages for ~1.5M times. I still don't think adding list_voltage for > the SMPS regulators makes any sense, unless either the API for > regulator_list_voltage is changed, or we change the control for these > regulators completely from set_voltage() based to set_voltage_sel() > based implementation. Well, the important thing here is to fill in something useful for the returned selector rather than just leaving it undefined. Providing a list_voltage() would be nice and make things more robust. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: