From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: tps6586x: add support for SYS rail Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 01:52:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20120804005234.GH4515@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1343906193-8309-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <501AAE55.3080504@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <501AAE55.3080504@wwwdotorg.org> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Laxman Dewangan , sameo@linux.intel.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, rob.herring@calxeda.com, swarren@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 10:44:05AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 08/02/2012 05:16 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: > > .desc = { \ > > + .supply_name = "sys", \ > > .name = "REG-SYS", \ > > .ops = &tps6586x_sys_regulator_ops, \ > > .type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE, \ > BTW, this patch touches both the regulator and MFD trees. I'm not sure > who will apply it. I think it relies on the patch to this driver Mark > recently applied in the regulator tree (for 3.7 I think) doesn't it, at > least for context? It varies - it's usually whichever tree the change logically belongs in (so adding a define for a new regulator in the MFD would go with the rest of the implementation of a new regulator but a change in the register I/O interface of the core would go via MFD).