On Thu, 16 Oct 2014, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 01:55:06PM -0500, atull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > From: Alan Tull <atull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Each output has individual on/off control. > > > > New in v6: > > * Much cleanup of the bindings document > > * s/vout_en/vout/g > > > > Hopefully this is getting closer. We will still have the potential problem of > > repeated node names on boards on boards that have many regulators of the same > > kind. If this can be handled in the regulator layer, that might be great. > > If we handle it here, whatever we come up with will have to keep the same > > name over reboots and be predictable enough to serve as regulator node names > > in the DT. I'm open for suggestions here. > > > > This patchset now uses "regulator: of: Provide simplified DT parsing method" > > which are in the next-20141014 tag of linux-next. > > > Hi Alan, > > Since the problems we have seen are in the regulator core code and not > in your patches, I added the series to -next. I fixed up the 'compatible' > example in the devicetree description, so there is no need to resubmit > the patches. > > Thanks, > Guenter > Hi Guenter, Thanks! Alan _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
