From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753715AbbKUUlH (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Nov 2015 15:41:07 -0500 Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:35781 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753210AbbKUUlF (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Nov 2015 15:41:05 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] regulator: tps65086: Add regulator driver for the TPS65086 PMIC To: Mark Brown References: <1447974102-24938-1-git-send-email-afd@ti.com> <1447974102-24938-4-git-send-email-afd@ti.com> <20151121133739.GG26072@sirena.org.uk> CC: Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Linus Walleij , Alexandre Courbot , Samuel Ortiz , Lee Jones , Liam Girdwood , , , From: "Andrew F. Davis" Message-ID: <5650D6D2.5060108@ti.com> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 14:40:50 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151121133739.GG26072@sirena.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/21/2015 07:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 05:01:41PM -0600, Andrew F. Davis wrote: >> Add support for TPS65086 PMIC regulators. >> >> The regulators set consists of 3 Step-down Controllers, 3 Step-down >> Converters, 3 LDOs, 3 Load Switches, and a Sink and Source LDO. The >> output voltages are configurable and are meant to supply power to a >> SoC and/or other components. > > An earlier version of this patch has already been applied, please don't > resend already applied patches but send incremental patches with any > changes. > Odd, I didn't seem to get any message for this getting applied. Looks like only a couple lines difference from the version in the regulators branch, I don't imagine you are able to rebase that with these changes? Anyway the reason that line needed changed is over a confusion in what the 'of_node' does in 'struct regulator_config'. The description seems to make it seem like it is the node that gets checked for init data. > * @of_node: OpenFirmware node to parse for device tree bindings (may be > * NULL). But the 'of_node' that is actually searched is the one given in regulator_config->dev->of_node. Is this intended behavior (drivers assume it is so it probably has to be now) and if so, the above description might need to be clarified as too what that 'of_node' pointer really does?