Re: [PATCH 4/5 v3] mmc: add a function to get a regulator, supplying card's Vdd

[Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1225 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:39:29PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2012, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Even if the supply is always on you can easily provide an always on
> > regulator.  From the point of view of the consumer if there are two
> > physical supplies needed it's much clearer and easier to just code that
> > and deal with the fact that we might have no control over them
> > externally, there's nothing device specific about that process.

> Mark, I'm not sure I understand your above comment correctly. The 
> function, that I add in this patch doesn't do much now, that we removed 

> IIUC, to satisfy Philip's requirement for a second regulator it would 
> suffice to just issue one more devm_regulator_get() and let the caller 
> deal with any errors. Is this what you're suggesting or are you against 
> adding the second regulator? We could of course also add it later, but 
> that would change the function prototype (unless we add regulator pointers 
> to struct mmc_host itself). Whith existing users such changes are a bit 
> messy...

Yes, that's what I'm suggesting.  I guess you could wrap the two
regulators up in a small struct without it being too invasive?

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]