* Grant Likely wrote: > On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 16:15:46 +0100, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Mark Brown wrote: > > > ...they all seem to be explicitly named in the device tree so presumably > > > there's enough information in there for the driver to pick any set of > > > regulators in any order. This would be much nicer to use. > > > > I don't like it much either. The only reason that requirement exists is > > because it makes the assignment of the regulator ID (as defined in the > > include/linux/mfd/tps6586x.h header) very trivial. Would it be better to > > look up the ID based on the node name (sm0 --> TPS6586X_ID_SM_0, ...)? > > > > Then the only requirement would be that the names match. > > Yes, please look up id via name. Alternately you can give each child node > a 'reg' property and put #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; in the > parent (assuming the regulator number is a documented attribute of the > hardware and not just a convenient linux construct). I'll go with the lookup via name then because as far as I can tell the datasheet doesn't list any specific ordering of the regulators. Thierry
Attachment:
pgpsgN0o_LKrI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
