On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:28:49AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 09:57:30AM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>>> + init_data->supply_regulator = (char *)of_get_property(dev->of_node,
>>>> + "regulator-supplies", NULL);
> > Mark, I still seem to be a little confused with this one as to why
> > we would need a phandle *and* a supply-name to reference a parent
> > regulator/supply.
> > The phandle would point to a regulator dt node and that node internally
> > would have just one name associated with it.
> To repeat: the supply name is for the consumer. It is needed so that
> the consumer can tell which supply is provided by which regulator.
> Almost all devices have more than one supply and if the device does
> anything more complicated than just turning on all the supplies when the
> device is active it's going to need to figure out which supply is which.
Hang on, I now have no idea what this is supposed to be doing. Later on
in the series you had examples in your commit logs with perfectly
sensible bindings for supplies:
vmmc-supply = <®ulator1>;
vpll-supply = <®ulator1>;
which have both a unique name and a direct reference to the supplying
regulator. What are these "regulator-supplies" properties supposed to
be?
--
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
