On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 05:54:48PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 27-04-16 17:52, Hans de Goede wrote: > >On 27-04-16 17:50, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >>On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 04:01:08PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> >>>To repeat you really shouldn't have *any* DT nodes for regulators that > >>>aren't in use, there should be nothing to put in their nodes. If > >>>there's anything there that's a sign that your DT has problems. > >>How should we deal with regulators that are on by default but are not > >>used in the system then? > >I think we've already solved that one, we do list them, thereby giving the > >regulator core permission to touch them and then let the regulator core > >turn them off for us. Yes. > To clarify, I do not believe that this is not about not having nodes for > unused regulators, but about not having nodes for regulators which should not > be touched. Correct. If we have constraints for a regulator then they should be accurate.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
