Subject: [PATCH 05/11] tps6586x: Add device-tree support

From: [email-masked] (Mark Brown)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:17:56 +0000

On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 04:15:46PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> * Mark Brown wrote:

> > ...they all seem to be explicitly named in the device tree so presumably
> > there's enough information in there for the driver to pick any set of
> > regulators in any order.  This would be much nicer to use.

> I don't like it much either. The only reason that requirement exists is
> because it makes the assignment of the regulator ID (as defined in the
> include/linux/mfd/tps6586x.h header) very trivial. Would it be better to
> look up the ID based on the node name (sm0 --> TPS6586X_ID_SM_0, ...)?

> Then the only requirement would be that the names match.

Yes, that's going to be more code but much nicer for users.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120308/f2f4032e/attachment.sig>