From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tushar Behera Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: Update vdd_arm regulator Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:40:16 +0530 Message-ID: <51C2E318.7020806@linaro.org> References: <1370516572-313-1-git-send-email-tushar.behera@linaro.org> <1975506.ECnduUFuut@flatron> <51B54BA8.9020104@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51B54BA8.9020104@linaro.org> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: kgene.kim@samsung.com Cc: Tomasz Figa , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, patches@linaro.org, broonie@kernel.org, swarren@wwwdotorg.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, rob.herring@calxeda.com, l.majewski@samsung.com, s.nawrocki@samsung.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 06/10/2013 09:14 AM, Tushar Behera wrote: > On 06/08/2013 05:22 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> Hi Tushar, >> >> On Thursday 06 of June 2013 16:32:52 Tushar Behera wrote: >>> Cpufreq driver for EXYNOS4210 is not a platform driver, hence it is not >>> possible to provide the regulator supply name through DT bindings. >>> Since the cpufreq driver requires the regulator to be named as >>> 'vdd_arm', the related regulator name should be kept same. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tushar Behera >>> --- >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-origen.dts | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-origen.dts >>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-origen.dts index bcf8079..bd5f589 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-origen.dts >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-origen.dts >>> @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ >>> }; >>> >>> buck1_reg: BUCK1 { >>> - regulator-name = "VDD_ARM_1.2V"; >>> + regulator-name = "vdd_arm"; >> >> Yes, this is the hack I mentioned in my review of >> [PATCH 0/2] Clock update for EXYNOS4210-CPUFREQ driver >> > > We can hold this patch till we get to a conclusion for the above > mentioned patch set. > Kukjin, We have agreed to go ahead with this approach till the cpufreq driver has not been modified. Can you please take this patch now? -- Tushar Behera