On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 09:29:38AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> [130613 08:35]:

> > No. If we go down that road *anything* that is connected to a
> > pad becomes part of the pinctrl subsystem, then pinctrl-single
> > becomes some kind of hardware abstraction or BIOS, and that
> > is *not* the intent. It is only supposed to deal with the bits
> > there that are 100% related to what pinctrl does, nothing else.

> Sounds like the way to go is to do a standalone regulator driver that
> optionally uses pinctrl-single,bits. But only for the bits in the PBIAS
> register that are 100% related to pinctrl.

> In any case the PBIAS regulator driver should be a separate driver
> as it may need to be a child of the SCM driver for PM needs in the
> future.

This all seems sensible to me.