From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Group and resource assignments for TWL4030 Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:55:21 -0800 Message-ID: <200902131255.21379.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <1234271495-11705-1-git-send-email-peter.de-schrijver@nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp127.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.65.186]:30755 "HELO smtp127.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752996AbZBMUzX (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:55:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1234271495-11705-1-git-send-email-peter.de-schrijver@nokia.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Peter 'p2' De Schrijver Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote: > > This patch introduces support for board specific group assignments of TWL4030 > resources. The resource type and type2 fields can also be specified. Do we have any real examples yet of needing to assign resources to anything other than P1 (processor)? I'd sort of like to stick to simplifying assumptions, notably "only P1 matters", until we have a clear need to switch to another one. This sort of thing ties into some patches I have floating around, to disable regulators turned on inappropriately by the boot loader. I was doing that in a late_initcall in the regulator driver ... but it's a bit messy, as the regulator framework has deficiencies in that area (too). - dave