From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2015 15:50:55 +0200 Subject: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH 2/8] mfd: axp20x: Add a cell for the usb power_supply part of the axp20x PMICs In-Reply-To: <5577EDD9.8020900@redhat.com> References: <1433885881-19809-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <1433885881-19809-3-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <5577EDD9.8020900@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20150613135055.GQ19653@lukather> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 09:57:13AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>@@ -368,6 +392,12 @@ static struct mfd_cell axp20x_cells[] = { > >> .resources = axp20x_pek_resources, > >> }, { > >> .name = "axp20x-regulator", > >>+ }, { > >>+ .name = "axp20x-usb-power-supply", > > > >Could we use either "vbus-power-supply" to match the AXP datasheets, > >or "otg-power-supply" which is slightly more obvious to board owners? > > I do not like the vbus name, since it does not indicate which bus > it is, OTOH you are right that is what it is called in the datasheet. > > As for using otg, I think that usb is better then. > > All in all I believe that the current usb name is best, but if others > disagree I'm open to renaming this. > > So anyone else have an opinion on what would be a good name for the > cell and the compatible ? I usually prefer to use the name mentionned in the datasheet, but if that doesn't make sense, feel free to use an alternative like this one. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: