On 9 August 2013 23:38, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Since the cpufreq-cpu0 driver is capable of coping without a software > controllable regulator and would be confused by a dummy one it should > use devm_regulator_get_optional() to ensure no dummy is provided. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > devm_regulator_get_optional() is a new API in my tree for -next, is it > OK to merge this patch via that branch? I don't see a issue with it, by Rafael has the authority :) Over that it would have been useful if we could have this patch as part of the series you posted for defining devm_regulator_get_optional(), and so we could have seen what's that patch is doing.. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
