On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 20:19:25, Nori, Sekhar wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 15:12:16, Nori, Sekhar wrote: > > Using a device_initcall() for initializing the voltage regulator > > on DA850 is not such a good idea because it gets called for all > > platforms - even those who do not have a regulator implemented. > > This leads to a big fat warning message during boot-up when > > regulator cannot be found. > > > > Instead, tie initialization of voltage regulator to cpufreq init. > > Define a platform specific init call which in case of DA850 gets > > used for initializing the regulator. On other future platforms it > > can be used for other purposes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <[email protected]> > > --- > > [...] > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c > > index a13a6c4..c2d2724 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c > > [...] > > > +static int __init da850_regulator_init(void) > > +{ > > + cvdd = regulator_get(NULL, "cvdd"); > > + if (WARN(IS_ERR(cvdd), "Unable to obtain voltage regulator for CVDD;" > > + " voltage scaling unsupported\n")) { > > + return PTR_ERR(cvdd); > > + } > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > +#endif > > + > > static struct davinci_cpufreq_config cpufreq_info = { > > .freq_table = &da850_freq_table[0], > > +#ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR > > + .init = da850_regulator_init, > > Oops, I introduced a section mismatch here. In this case, it is > pretty harmless though since cpufreq cannot be a module. > > I will fix this (by getting rid of __init for da850_regulator_init) > when reposting along with any other comments on the patch.
Kevin, I think you missed seeing this or I confused you by posting a revision only for patch 1/6 of the series yesterday. I will post this fix as a separate patch. Thanks, Sekhar _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
