"Ghongdemath, Girish" <girishsg@xxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Pandita, Vikram <vikram.pandita@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Girish S G <girishsg@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-4430sdp.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-4430sdp.c
>>> index 04b7770..46f6800 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-4430sdp.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-4430sdp.c
>>> @@ -560,6 +560,9 @@ static struct i2c_board_info __initdata sdp4430_i2c_4_boardinfo[] = {
>>> };
>>> static int __init omap4_i2c_init(void)
>>> {
>>> + /* This will allow unused regulator to be shutdown */
>>> + regulator_has_full_constraints();
>>> +
>>
>> Any particular reason to keep this call in i2c_init() function?
>> Does not look very intuitive to have generic regulator disable call in
>> an i2c init function !
>
> In the regulator late init call the core will decide on regulator
> status, so this has to be specified
> before the pmic/twl data is registered.
Vikram's point still stands. This is not related to I2C init, so it
should not be in the i2c init function.
Just make it the last call the machine-specific .init_machine function.
Kevin
--
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
