Hi Mark, Am 28.09.2014 um 12:22 schrieb Mark Brown: > On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 12:59:47AM +0000, Stefan Wahren wrote: >> This patch adds the Device tree bindings for the Freescale MXS >> on-chip regulators. > Use subject lines matching the style for the subsystem. sorry i'm not sure what's wrong with the subject lines. Did you expect "[PATCH 1/2] regulator: add binding for mxs regulator"? > >> +Required regulator properties: >> +- compatible: Must be "fsl,mxs-regulator" >> +- reg: Absolute physical address of the register set for the regulator >> + >> +Any regulator property defined as part of the core regulator >> +binding, defined in regulator.txt, can also be used. > While this should be using compatibles to identify which regulator is > being supported note that the binding doesn't document the fact that the > code makes regulator-name mandatory or what values are required. Is the following better? - fsl,mxs-regulator-vddd - fsl,mxs-regulator-vdda - fsl,mxs-regulator-vddio Thanks Stefan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
