From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] ARM: dts: omap4-panda: Add USB Host support Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:27:15 -0700 Message-ID: <20130619122715.GA5523@atomide.com> References: <1371571487-14389-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <1371571487-14389-2-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <51C106A1.9030001@ti.com> <51C15F7E.5020305@ti.com> <20130619074605.GW5523@atomide.com> <51C183AC.8040801@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51C183AC.8040801@ti.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Benoit Cousson Cc: Roger Quadros , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org * Benoit Cousson [130619 03:17]: > On 06/19/2013 02:46 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > >We have a similar issue with the MMC1 PBIAS. I think in the long run we > >should expand regulator (and possibly pinctrl) framework(s) to handle > >comparators. We could just assume that a comparatator is a regulator, > >and have a comparator binding that just uses the regulator code. > > In the case of pbias, the pinctrl seems to be a much better fit for > my point of view. pinctrl can handle pin configuration and this is > what the pbias is in the case of MMC pins. Well just recently Linus W specifically wanted us to use regulator framework for the MMC1 PBIAS rather than pinctrl. That's because from consumer driver point of view, it changes voltage and there's a delay involved. So I guess no conclusion yet, and it's best to do stand alone drivers to deal with those that use pinctrl for the pinctrl specific parts and export it as a regulator for the consumer devices. That's pretty much along the lines what Roger has done, except the transceiver could use the pinctrl-single,bits for the muxing and pinconf. Regards, Tony