On Saturday 02 June 2012 12:53 AM, Stephen Warren wrote:
We could either augment struct of_regulator_match with an integer ID
field for each regulator (which would perhaps make it slightly painful
to write the nodes and keep the IDs matched up), or add a new property
to each regulator provider node e.g. regulator-id which contained the
name that the regulator driver knows the regulator as (which would match
struct of_regulator_match.name), since the existing regulator-name
property is used for semantically different purposes.
That would result in:
tps65911: tps65911@2d {
compatible = "ti,tps65911";
reg =<0x2d>;
#gpio-cells =<2>;
gpio-controller;
regulators {
#address-cells =<1>;
#size-cells =<0>;
vdd1_reg: regulator@0 {
reg =<0>;
regulator-id = "vdd1"; /* Internal name */
regulator-name = "vdd_1v2_gen"; /* Signal on schematic
*/
...
};
vdd2_reg: regulator@1 {
reg =<1>;
regulator-id = "vdd2";
regulator-name = "vdd_1v5_gen";
...
So is it fine to go on the above binding?
In this case we need to find the match_regulator based on regulator-id
rather than by name.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
