From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] arm/dts: regulator: Add tps65910 device tree data Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 09:51:38 -0700 Message-ID: <20120827165137.GL4339@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1345547850-29761-1-git-send-email-anilkumar@ti.com> <1345547850-29761-2-git-send-email-anilkumar@ti.com> <5033ADC5.4030002@wwwdotorg.org> <20120821163805.GW7995@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <5033CDDB.808@wwwdotorg.org> <20120821180847.GC7995@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120824201634.GZ11011@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:46597 "EHLO opensource.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752432Ab2H0Qvk (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 12:51:40 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120824201634.GZ11011@atomide.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Stephen Warren , AnilKumar Ch , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 01:16:34PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Mark Brown [120821 11:09]: > > The board shouldn't have to define the regulators, the regulator driver > > really ought to be able to figure out that they're there by itself if > > there's no configuration based purely on knowing which chip is there. > > From that point of view it's OK for the chip .dtsi to have them (though > > ideally the driver wouldn't *need* that either) which was what was > > happening here. > So I assume no changes needed here then? Seems that way.