On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 01:07:02PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On pią, 2014-10-31 at 10:32 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > We could always add a callback for the driver to handle any custom > > properties... one of the advantages of an OS like Linux is that we can > > improve the core code. > I thought about this - adding a callback, called on each child in > regulator_of_get_init_data(). However the reason behind this callback is > to parse GPIO and set config.ena_gpio. However in that context the > regulator_config is const so the callback cannot change it. Unless it > casts it to non-const... which isn't what we want I think. > So now I wonder whether adding generic bindings for ena_gpio make sense. > These would look like bindings for fixed-regulator (with "ena-" prefix). > Unfortunately this would duplicate a little the ena_gpio in > regulator_config... but to me it seems more appropriate. > What do you think about adding generic bindings for ena_gpio? Well, if you only want this for enable GPIO control (sorry, I'm really not reading a lot of these long threads when it looks like there'll be a resubmit anyway) we can always add a way for drivers to specify the name of a property to look at easily enough.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
