From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 11:18:55 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: ux300: Fix unimplementable regulation constraints In-Reply-To: References: <1333212293-6287-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <20120401101855.GA3153@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 12:00:13PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Mark Brown > > It doesn't make sense to grant permission to change the status of a > > regulator that is also set as always on and similarly it doesn't make > > sense to allow a driver to change the voltage of a regulator which can > > only be set to a single voltage. > Most probably correct. > Acked-by: Linus Walleij > Do you want me to funnel this to ARM-SoC or will you carry it in the > regulator tree? May as well send it via ARM-SoC, there's no interdependency with the regulator tree here. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: