From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
Cc: "lrg@ti.com" <lrg@ti.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: use correct device for device supply lookup
Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 18:28:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120519172842.GW4039@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FB7D4D8.2050501@nvidia.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1193 bytes --]
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:44:00PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> On Saturday 19 May 2012 10:11 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 07:44:06PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> >>When registering the regulator driver, use the rdev->dev for
> >>getting the regulator device of given supply instead of parent
> >>device.
> >You're providing no motivation for this and it's difficult to see how it
> >improves things. The class device is dynamically numbered so it's not
> >suitable for specifying supplies on a non-DT system and for a DT system
> >it's not obvious to me that we would want to involve the class device in
> >anything, it requires an additional layer of indirection but that's
> >about it.
> If I dont do this then it will not enter in the following case for
> getting the regulator_dev of supply regulator because dev->of_node
> is null, the tps65910-regulator driver have not set the
> pdev->dev.ofnode.
But why, why should it do that and how is this related to your patch?
You're *really* not explaining anything clearly with what you're doing
with device tree... it's not clear what you're trying to do here or
that you've understood what's there currently.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-19 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-19 14:14 [PATCH] regulator: core: use correct device for device supply lookup Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 16:41 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 17:14 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 17:20 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 17:40 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 17:56 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 18:26 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 19:03 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 20:50 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 21:13 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 23:13 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-20 7:34 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-20 9:01 ` Mark Brown
[not found] ` <4FB8C9EF.7010400@nvidia.com>
2012-05-20 12:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-20 12:14 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-20 12:10 ` Laxman Dewangan
2012-05-19 17:28 ` Mark Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120519172842.GW4039@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox