On 5/20/2013 11:28 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 05/20/2013 09:24 AM, Rhyland Klein wrote: >> On 5/17/2013 7:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 04/10/2013 01:51 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote: >>>> The charger is now represented by a distinct subnode of the tps65090 >>>> device. Add this node and enable low current charging with it. >>> >>> What's the status of the TPS60590 bindings; are they agreed upon by >>> NVIDIA, TI, and SlimLogic yet? In other words, is this patch still >>> something I should apply for 3.11, or does it need to be reworked? >> >> I haven't seen any discussion with slimlogic or TI about the tps65090. >> As far as I know the bindings for this driver haven't changed. >> >> Laxman, do you think the work on the palmas driver will impact the >> design of the bindings for the tps65090? > > Sorry, perhaps I'm confusing two different chips. If TPS65090 isn't > Palmas, then ignore my question. In which case, I suppose I should just > apply your patch then? > I would say yes. The design of having the child node this way was how we had agreed worked best. The only reason I would see a significant reason to change this, is if something was decided that all mfd devices should start to follow some pattern which differed, which would mean changing existing bindings and therefore is unlikely. -rhyland -- nvpublic -- 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
