From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org (Greg KH) Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:23:34 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 01/15] drivers: phy: add generic PHY framework In-Reply-To: <1769609.rbAYfG9ir3@flatron> References: <1731726.KENstTPhkb@flatron> <20130723205007.GA27166@kroah.com> <1769609.rbAYfG9ir3@flatron> Message-ID: <20130723212334.GA21945@kroah.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:05:48PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > That's not so bad, as long as you let the phy core use whatever name it > > wants for the device when it registers it with sysfs. > > Yes, in regulator core consumer names are completely separated from this. > Regulator core simply assigns a sequential integer ID to each regulator > and registers /sys/class/regulator/regulator.ID for each regulator. Yes, that's fine. > > Use the name you > > are requesting as a "tag" or some such "hint" as to what the phy can be > > looked up by. > > > > Good luck handling duplicate "tags" :) > > The tag alone is not a key. Lookup key consists of two components, > consumer device name and consumer tag. What kind of duplicate tags can be > a problem here? Ok, I didn't realize it looked at both parts, that makes sense, thanks. greg k-h