On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:17:06AM +0200, Grant Likely wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:32:19AM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > On Friday 21 October 2011 05:28 PM, Shawn Guo wrote: > > >On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 02:11:55PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > >[...] > > >>>+ /* find device_node and attach it */ > > >>>+ rdev->dev.of_node = of_find_node_by_name(NULL, regulator_desc->name); > > >> > > >>so would this do a complete dt search for every regulator? > > > > > >Yes, with the first param being NULL, tthe entire device tree will be > > >searched. > > > > > >>we would also need the driver names and dt names to match for this to > > >>work, right? > > >> > > >Driver name does not matter. The key for this search to work is having > > >regulator's name (regulator_desc->name) match device tree node's name, > > >case ignored. > > > > Mark, whats your take on this? I am somehow not quite sure if we should > > have this limitation put in to match DT node names with whats in the > > driver structs (regulator_desc). > > This looks wrong to me. Matching based on node /name/, particularly > when searching the entire tree, will cause problems. > Okay, it's wrong then since so many people say it's wrong :) I guess a quick fix would be adding one property in device tree node for matching some unique field in regulator_desc, id, maybe? Mark, any suggestion? -- Regards, Shawn -- 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
