On Monday 16 March 2009, Mark Brown wrote: > On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 09:05:29PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > > > was called. It's not exactly hard to check if it was enabled, then > > act accordingly, in the typical "single consumer of the regulator" > > case. > > How typical that is depends very much on the devices you're looking at. I'd have said "systems you're looking at" ... but so long as the boot_on flag exists, then this issue can appear with absolutely any regulator, used for anything. The basic issue addressed by $SUBJECT patch just restores internal consistency to the framework, in the face of such flags (or equivalent actions by the boot loader). > Devices that need to do things like set voltages are fairly likely to > own the regulator but with devices that just need to ensure that they > have their supplies enabled it's much more likely that the supplies will > be shared. Right. Do you have a model how such shared supplies would coexist with the "enabled at boot time" model, and still support being disabled? My first thought is that the system designer should avoid such boot_on modes. But that's not always going to work. - Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
