lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/2] regulator: add device tree support for max8997
>> On 25.01.2012 12:22, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> The big problem there seems like specifying voltages in the first
>>> place, if we know what device it is we should already know what's
>>> going on.
>
>> Driver which handles said regulator might know what's going on, but
>> that might not be case for its consumers. Should we limit ability to
>> query given parameter just because its value is hardcoded in hardware?
>
> I'm sorry, this makes no sense. Setting a value in the constraints is
> not going to have any impact on the value reported by the driver, it
> never has.

... with the exception of fixed regulator, that is. This is from where I
got my flawed understanding.

Looking at other drivers I see that's indeed special case not practiced
elsewhere.

Thanks for explaining this.

Regards,
--
Karol Lewandowski | Samsung Poland R&D Center | Linux/Platform


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-27 11:01    [W:0.041 / U:0.916 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site