On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 05:30:57PM +0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote: > > > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 08:57:52AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > > > +Required properties: > > > + - compatible: should be "rohm,bd71837-pmic". > > > + - regulator-name: should be "buck1", ..., "buck8" and "ldo1", ..., "ldo7" > > > > The MFD is for a single device, there should be no need for compatibles > > on subfunctions. > > I will check this. I must admit I am not sure what is the de-facto mechanism > for assigning the correct device-tree nodes to sub devices if compatibles > are not used? I think I saw device-tree node name being used for regulators You can look at the regulators node within the parent device, you know that in Linux the parent device will be the MFD. Having a compatible string within the device makes no difference here. There's quite a few in tree examples of this. > Also, another thing I was wondering is how supply regulators should be > handled? In this case the LDO5 is supplied by BUCK6 and LDO6 by > BUCK7. > From generic regulator bindings > /Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt > I found statement: > > - <name>-supply: phandle to the parent supply/regulator node None of that stuff uses compatible strings, just handle it as covered in the bindings.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
