From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:39:18 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: pxa: fix build failure for regulator consumer in em-x270.c In-Reply-To: References: <1331244366-6147-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <4F732C97.2030804@compulab.co.il> <20120328152743.GW3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <20120328153918.GX3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:37:37PM +0800, Haojian Zhuang wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:27 PM, Mark Brown > > These don't look like good fixes, you should be specifying the > > dev_name() for the consumer device? ?Presumably it's two separate > > consumers and should be .0 and .1 or something? > Could you do a quick update on dev_name() according to Mark's comment? > -REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo10, &pxa_device_mci.dev, "vcc sdio"); > +REGULAOTR_CONSUMER(ldo10, dev_name(&pxa_device_mci.dev), "vcc sdio"); No, you're missing the point again. As I said previously the whole point of this interface is that you don't have to have access to the struct device. This should be the string *returned* by dev_name(), not a direct call to dev_name(). -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: