Hello Mark,

On 10/17/2014 03:54 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:39:15PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> 
>> Just to be sure I understood correctly, are you suggesting something like 
>> this?
> 
>>      ldo1_reg: LDO1 {
>>              regulator-name = "vdd_1v0";
>>              regulator-min-microvolt = <1000000>;
>>              regulator-max-microvolt = <1000000>;
>>              regulator-state-mem {
>>                      regulator-on-in-suspend;
>>                      regulator-mode = <MAX77802_OPMODE_LP>;
>>              };
>>      };
> 
>> In other words, extending Chanwoo Choi's original suspend state binding to 
>> add
>> the regulator-mode property that was present in his v3 [0] but instead trying
>> to use the standard REGULATOR_MODE_*, say that each regulator driver should
>> define it's own device-specific set of modes and a do the translation to fill
>> standard modes in the struct regulation_constraints {initial,disk,mem} mode?
> 
>> That way adding new suspend states, will only require changing the generic
>> regulator binding but not the regulator driver specific bindings.
> 
> Something like that, yes.  Not sure if numbers or strings are the best

Perfect will re-spin then, many thanks again for your feedback and suggestions.

> way of doing the mode but it probably doesn't matter too much now we
> have preprocessor support for inclue files.
> 

I usually prefer to avoid strings when possible since a typo can't be
detected when building the DTB and could be hard to debug at runtime while
a typo on a macro will be detected by the preprocessor at build time.

But I don't have a strong opinion either.

Best regards,
Javier
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to