On Tuesday 22 May 2012 11:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 05/22/2012 11:56 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
On Tuesday 22 May 2012 10:49 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 05/22/2012 11:09 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
On Tuesday 22 May 2012 10:10 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 05/22/2012 07:05 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
Add device info for the PMIC device tps65911 in tegra-cardhu
dts file. This device supports the multiple regulator rails,
gpio, interrupts.
...
Nitpicky, but the labels might be more logical as reg_vdd1 rather than
vdd1_reg, but not a big deal.
So, please replace the line above with:
reg_vdd1: regulator@0 {
reg =<0>;
Why do we really require the reg at all?
I dont think any usage of doing this.
Oh, perhaps you meant the reg property not "reg_" in the label name?
It is required because the parent node has #address-cells and
#size-cells and because the node name itself has a unit address ("@nnn").
But we can not put
reg_vdd1:regulator@0 {
::::::::::::::
}
due to their dt binding with their node names.
In this case still do we need reg=<0> and #address-cells and #size-cells?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
