Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 10:36:41AM +0100, ext Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 08:54:02AM +0530, Gupta, Ajay Kumar wrote: > > > > > I think we can add a check for supply name in EHCI driver, if its > > > valid then we will call regulator_get()/enable() but if it's NULL then don't do anything. > > > > > > So the boards which don't use any regulator they can pass a NULL to supply name. > > I don't know if I'm the only one, but Anand's mails are coming in over > 80 chars lines. Sorry. Broken mailer I suppose :( > > > No, this would be a substantial misuse of the regulator API. The supply > > name should not be being passed through as platform data, the driver > > should request a fixed name (usually the name of the relevant physical > > supply to the chip) and let the API map this onto the actual supply for > > the system. > > I agree with Mark here. The best solution would be to provide a fixed > voltage regulator for the other boards. > How do you add a fixed voltage regulator for a board which doesn't really have a controllable regulator for that voltage? (the PHY supply is wired directly from the main board power-supply, no GPIO for on-off control) Maybe a dummy regulator would be useful? -- 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
