On 2/9/22 16:03, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 03:50:13PM +0100, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: [snip] > >> But I understand why the Device Tree binding and fbdev driver used VBAT >> since that's what the documentation mentions. > > What is "the documentation" in this context and how is that distinct > from the datasheet for the display controller? In general the consumer > driver should be using the name from the datasheet and the regulator > itself should get a regulator-name reflecting the name in the schematic. > For "documentation" I meant the datasheet that mentions VBAT but I got what you mean and will also propose a change to the binding to rename the property to vcc-supply instead to match the pin name in the device. >>> It is depressingly common to see broken code here, unfortunately >>> graphics drivers seem like one of the most common offendors. > >> I'll include a patch for the existing DT binding and mark the vbat-supply >> property as required. Probably we won't be able to change the fbdev driver >> without causing regressions, and I'm not interested in that driver anyways. > > There should be little danger of causing regressions given that a dummy > regualtor will be provided when one is missing. Right, I forgot that a dummy regulator is provided in that case. Perfect. Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Linux Engineering Red Hat
