On 07/05/2012 04:57 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
I agree. Non-DT platforms have always used the callbacks to execute this kind of code. As you've said before there are situations where it isn't just about setting a GPIO or enabling a regulator but it also requires a specific timing. Representing this in the platform data would become tedious.
That will settle the whole issue then.
So I think for the DT case you can parse the power-on and power-off sequences directly and execute code based on it, while in non-DT cases the init and exit callbacks should be used instead. I think it even makes sense to reuse the platform data's init and exit functions in the DT case and implement the parser/interpreter within those.
It totally makes sense indeed.
I case where the regulator comes from a DT it should assume that it will become available at some point, so -EPROBE_DEFER is correct. However if the DT doesn't even contain the power-supply property, then EPROBE_DEFER will never work because there's no regulator to become available.
Indeed. And as Sascha mentionned this could easily be fixed. Guess I can also submit a patch for that while I am at it.
Alex. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
