On Tuesday 14 May 2013 03:24 PM, Graeme Gregory wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 02:48:53PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
On Tuesday 07 May 2013 04:15 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 03:17:08PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
On Tuesday 07 May 2013 01:28 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
The platform can provide it's own vbus control in which case this is
not needed.
So why is there no interaction with this external VBUS control and how
does the driver distinguish between that and an error getting the
regulator?
The platform specifies if it provides its own VBUS control by the dt
property ti,no_control_vbus. So the driver will give an error only
when *ti,no_control_vbus* is not set. Graeme?
That doesn't answer the question about why there's no interaction with
the external control...
Graeme?
I already partially answered this, it was written for a SoC where VBUS
generation was in hardware on the SoC with no information.
I would say if nvidia/Laxman do not need this remove it, if someone ever
uses it then they can re-add it easy enough!
I think we really do not require this. Just we need the notification
through extcon about the cable connection. We should remove it for
avoiding complexity for now.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
