On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:30:47PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Mark Brown <broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> [120321 12:03]:

> > That should be changed to pass in a boolean flag rather than a pointer
> > to platform device - the board may not have direct access to the
> > relevant regulator (eg, if it's part of a MFD) or the regulator may be
> > on another bus like I2C (for simpler regulator only devices).

> Hmm I see. This means that we need to patch some board files anyways
> for the boolean flag to use the fixed regulator. This is because for
> some cases vddvario and vdd33a regulators can come from the mfd/tps/twl
> chip and it's unsafe to assume that gpmc-smsc911x.c can set up these
> regulators automatically. Passing a boolean flag to not set up the
> default regulator would work too, but we'd rather eventually see
> the real board specific regulators being patched in.

Yes, ideally the boards would do everything and gpmc-smsc911x.c should
be able to completely ignore regulators.

> So if that's the case, we might as well patch the board files
> to add the fixed regulators for each one and drop all the regulator
> code from gpmc-smsc911x.c.

That's my preferred option, hopefully with the helpers we have for
regulator registration we shouldn't need to add device specific helpers.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to