From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: tegra: set regulator full constraints Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 22:29:53 +0000 Message-ID: <20131113222953.GA26614@sirena.org.uk> References: <527A1C47.6050405@nvidia.com> <20131106110154.GG11602@sirena.org.uk> <5281C228.3000404@nvidia.com> <5282717C.3050502@wwwdotorg.org> <20131113122329.GC878@sirena.org.uk> <5283B6E3.9070206@wwwdotorg.org> <20131113190745.GD878@sirena.org.uk> <5283DD52.5050903@wwwdotorg.org> <20131113204923.GG878@sirena.org.uk> <5283F625.403@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5283F625.403-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Wei Ni , "linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org --oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 02:59:01PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 11/13/2013 01:49 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > > No, with DT you can say that if there is no DT binding configuring > > a given thing (clock, regulator, GPIO or whatever) then no amount > > of module loading will ever cause it to appear - this is what the > > flag in question controls. > But we do have a binding for regulators, so wouldn't that flag always > be true? In theory. In practice people often add bindings for devices without including the regulators and then someone comes along and adds the regulators later, perhaps not even using a system with DT, and renders all existing DTs buggy. This is generally miserable for everyone so it's better if we're liberal in what we accept. > Perhaps you can suggest a name for the flag, and a specific set of > conditions when it will have specific values. That might help me > understand what you mean. Well, of_have_populated_dt() is essentially doing the same thing (probably, I don't know if it's set at quite the right time) - it's saying we have a DT. We could even change the users to check that as well if it's doing the right thing. > Are you confusing having a binding (schema definition) with having DT > content ("foo-supply" property)? No. --oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSg/1eAAoJELSic+t+oim9ex4QAIXgGSC2u6yG9b8urC8rfch6 DzbYkm7jjnAoawyzFtSrSmw+TZ3MY27sHTIdE9GA7WjiY43bHRLw8Zw85S+0bARx TA584U9Hd1CKmAnQ/BzrvkL2+W8UNeuXGyCnQ9i/5QsB+WW5s+5E6Vmgfg4QTn2o lSQ1le7mtddGg7WV9oaLDZrArS8z0cRC0ovBjwdQqkeQgcxzkArqt8kmHvMjPFhe dBCia5P/HysEfBpweFUSRnOU2Z8n01D6WWzcChi0sRc+lLWQqyHZwk/e/7BRPT0r dFf5YZbaEs6soug3TvTmUc+l2MPJfNgAmfPNDkOHsO5c94OfwANpbKjoS5+qZ//C HaOymUMP5q63HHT5aMp81EKycZc+L794xRrN3Yau/4eETd5pEoGE0sc+NWgDdZkX 7qQcDnrP2cBH3l/kI12FYNjLslwQhfOTsbEkTm268MNq7+qiIzCtdI6J6Kha64XZ 5t8a/tl3lmzJXFEiO+u8faa0a43/aGzs5U5uOiBHWnD564TPWpU350pPXXyKPpTN LJNuuqYNIu4mV3jiMhNujtlV0oHC5dB3wLuUO18J/eaDjnvZwlYPKDZqAoNI3K4N fl8PC8Q+xweptCUxTE4j9JaFPxtqStlDxVVILAagV13KA+SAmB9aaQsCBYgnkcUz VYUMqW6bhKsYOYboOB1X =ZR+B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --oyUTqETQ0mS9luUI--