Em Wed, 17 Apr 2013 14:55:03 +0100 Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 08:04:52PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: > > > It's probably more clean to provide a dummy clock/regulator in a host driver > > (platform) than to add something in a sub-device drivers that would resolve > > which resources should be requested and which not. > > Yes, that's the general theory for regulators at least - it allows the > device driver to just trundle along and not worry about how the board is > hooked up. The other issue it resolves that you didn't mention is that > it avoids just ignoring errors which isn't terribly clever. I agree. Adding dummy clock/regulator at the host platform driver makes sense, as the platform driver knows how the board is hooked up; keeping it at the I2C driver doesn't make sense, so the code needs to be moved away from it. Laurent, Could you please work on a patch moving that code to the host platform driver? Thanks! Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
