From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones) Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:36:28 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 08/22] regulator: Change ab8500 match names to reflect Device Tree In-Reply-To: <20120530164152.GP9947@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1338353260-10097-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1338353260-10097-9-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <20120530100302.GD9947@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120530121547.GJ9947@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4FC63632.4030504@linaro.org> <20120530151119.GN9947@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4FC63B39.6040905@linaro.org> <20120530164152.GP9947@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <4FC846CC.20801@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 31/05/12 00:41, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:22:33PM +0800, Lee Jones wrote: >> On 30/05/12 23:11, Mark Brown wrote: > >>>> vin-supply =<&db8500_vape_reg>; >>>> vmmc-supply =<&ab8500_ldo_aux2_reg>; > >>> Oh, oops. This is going to be fun when someone puts down two of the >>> same PMIC on a system... > >> What does that mean sorry? > > Lots of regulators are using this mechanism for identifying child nodes. > If the node name is also used as a handle by other things to reference > the regulator then if you have two PMICs of the same type DTC isn't > going to be able to figure out which node you mean. Yes, so it doesn't look like this is an issue. This: > sdi at 80126000 { > vmmc-supply = <&ab8500_ldo_aux3_reg>; > }; Is the same as, and will cause no more issues than: > static struct regulator_consumer_supply ab8500_vaux3_consumers[] = { > REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "sdi0"), > }; ... because only nodes which we care about (dictated by compatible declaration protections) will be parsed. So different platforms will not affect each other. Kind regards, Lee -- 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