Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 20 May 2012 17:44:51 +0530 | From | Laxman Dewangan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: use correct device for device supply lookup |
| |
On Sunday 20 May 2012 05:36 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > * PGP Signed by an unknown key > > On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 04:09:43PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> On Sunday 20 May 2012 02:31 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >>> No. This is happening because the device tree doesn't have any supplies >>> mapped for the regulators. This is nothing at all to do with where the >>> code looks for the supplies, no matter where it looks there's nothing to >>> find. >> No, we should not put the regulator mapping under parent, need to >> have under "regulator" otherwise we need to fix the issue in dt >> parsing where first it looks for "regulator" and then parse the rail >> mapping. > What is this issue and why should we not fix it? >
I will go with the way it is done in mc13892 driver and then it is not require to change the node layouts for regulator.
> > >> I want to have similar fix in my tps65910-regulator.c. > So why can't you do what mc13892 is doing? >
Fine, I will post the similar fix in tps65910-regulator to match with the mc13892 regulator driver. I tested this and it worked fine if changes are done in same way.
>> I am sorry that I am not able to explain the issue correctly. I think >> I will take help from Stephen Warren here to first explain him and >> then I will come back for core changes. > OK, I guess. I think a key thing here is that these shouldn't be any > different to any other supply. Adding something that is specific to > regulator-regulator supplies doesn't do that so is a clear sign that > something has been missed.
I tested by moving the regulator supply to top level as you suggested and then core driver change does not needed. So I will add this in dt documentation for tps65911 and do some more changes in driver to take proper pin name.
| |