Hi,
On Wed, Jun 13 2012, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
>> > +struct mmc_supply {
>> > + struct regulator *vmmc; /* Card power supply */
>> > + struct regulator *vqmmc; /* Optional Vccq supply */
>> > +};
>>
>> I believe your intention is to provide this functionality for the host drivers
>> as the common way of handling card regulators. Then, I would suggest to
>> include these two new regulators in the mmc_host struct, instead of having
>> this in a separate struct, which then also needs to be handled by every host
>> driver.
>
> I have no strong preference about this. Having an additional struct is how
> I interpreted Mark's proposal:
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/14624/focus=14876
>
> but I'm also fine with putting it in mmc_host. Chris, what's your
> preference?
I think Mark was just trying to help with your observation that the
changes are messy. I don't see any compelling reasons to avoid adding
these to mmc_host -- does anyone else feel strongly?
So, I'd say go ahead and post an updated patch that uses mmc_host,
and we can see if Mark has any thoughts.
Thanks,
- Chris.
--
Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
