Hello! On Jun 6, 2011, at 5:21 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> -static struct regulator_consumer_supply sdp4430_vaux_supply[] = { >> - { >> - .supply = "vmmc", >> - .dev_name = "omap_hsmmc.1", >> - }, >> -}; >> +static struct regulator_consumer_supply sdp4430_vaux_supply = >> + REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "omap_hsmmc.1"); > this should be an array, as it was before. Only one is defined right now. Whoever needs a second element can convert it to array, I think? What;s the importance of having it as an array right now? >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-cm-t35.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-cm-t35.c >> @@ -337,13 +337,11 @@ static void __init cm_t35_init_display(void) >> } >> } >> >> -static struct regulator_consumer_supply cm_t35_vmmc1_supply = { >> - .supply = "vmmc", >> -}; >> +static struct regulator_consumer_supply cm_t35_vmmc1_supply = >> + REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "omap_hsmmc.0"); > > this should also be array. It should read as: > > static struct regulator_consumer_supply cm_t35_vmmc1_supply[] = > REGULATOR_SUPPLY("vmmc", "omap_hsmmc.0", > }; Why this one should be an array? There is only one vmmc supply in functionality-reduced implementation TWL used on this board. (in fact this particular board files defines more supplies then there are in the TWL and I planned to do another patch that would kill all the defined but not really existing supplies next like vpll2 and such). Bye, Oleg-- 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