From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones) Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:33:02 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 15/16] ARM: ux500: Add regulator support for nomadik-i2c into the db8500 Device Tree In-Reply-To: References: <1337330355-17747-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1337330355-17747-16-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <4FBB4782.9090101@linaro.org> <4FC45598.903@linaro.org> Message-ID: <4FC56ABE.2020700@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 30/05/12 08:09, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Lee Jones wrote: >> [Me] >>> I'm told not to put DT bindings for things in place if they are >>> incorrect, since they get set in stone... and I'm told we should >>> probably remove this one regulator from the device rather. >>> I'm just uncertain. >> >> Nothing is set in stone. I'm always happy to do clean-ups and code >> corrections. :) > > So assume this one device tree gets deployed, and some poor windows > phone developer start scratching his head about the strange voltage > domain regulator for the I2C device, when in reality there is no such > thing, there is only an APE voltage domain regulator common for all > these devices. > > So with device trees the fit between physical reality and what we > model in the kernel needs to be as close as possible or we will > cause trouble. > > That's the implications it will have unless we get it right, and that's > why I'm hesitant. I'm more than happy to 'do the right thing', but I need to know what that is first. -- Lee Jones Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead M: +44 77 88 633 515 Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog