From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ldewangan@nvidia.com (Laxman Dewangan)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:08:24 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: dt: tegra: seaboard: add regulators
In-Reply-To: <4FE8EFC4.3090509@wwwdotorg.org>
References: <1340406842-27135-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
 <4FE80413.6070001@nvidia.com> <4FE87FE3.1080608@wwwdotorg.org>
 <4FE882A5.3080504@nvidia.com>
 <20120625222646.GB30406@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <4FE8EFC4.3090509@wwwdotorg.org>
Message-ID: <4FE958E0.8030205@nvidia.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tuesday 26 June 2012 04:39 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/25/2012 04:26 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 08:54:21PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>
>>> I had detailed discussion with Mark on  this support and as per
>>> him (based on my understanding), the input to different regulator
>>> is from the pin of the chips and so the name should be the
>>> <pin-name>-supply which should be part of chip-dt binding, not
>>> to the particular rail.
>> More specifically, all the supplies for a device (including those
>> that happen to be inputs for regulators) should be specified in
>> exactly the same fashion.  This makes the binding more regular and
>> means that users can just go through the schematic adding the
>> mappings without worrying about what what the supply happens to
>> be.
> Just making sure I parsed that right. I think what you're saying is
> that the device itself should represent its input pins, e.g.:
>
> tps6586x {
>      vin-ldo01-supply =<&some_regulator>;

I think it is fine. The pin name as per data sheet is VINLDO01 and so we 
can have vin-ldo01.


>      vin-ldo23-supply =<...>;
>      vin-ldo4-supply =<...>;
>      vin-ldo678-supply =<...>;
>      vin-ldo9-supply =<...>;
>
>      regulators {
>          regulator at 0 {
>              regulator-compatible = "ldo0";
>              ...
>          };
>          regulator at 1 {
>              regulator-compatible = "ldo1";
>              ...
>          };
>      };
> };
>
> (and then the driver internally uses the *-supply to set up the
> parents of each of its own regulators)
>
> ... rather than each regulator specifying its parent, which might
> result in some duplication, since in this case both ldo0/1 are
> supplied from the same input pin:
>
> tps6586x {
>      regulators {
>          regulator at 0 {
>              regulator-compatible = "ldo0";
>              vin-supply =<&some_regulator>;
>              ...
>          };
>          regulator at 1 {
>              regulator-compatible = "ldo1";
>              vin-supply =<&some_regulator>;
>              ...
>          };
>      };
> };