Voltage and current regulator: usage of 'regulators' parent node in device tree

Voltage and current regulator: usage of 'regulators' parent node in device tree

[embedded (VIVAVIS AG)]

I see a lot of Devicetrees wrapping the regulator nodes within a parent node
like this

regulators {
    compatible = "simple-bus";
    #address-cells = <1>;
    #size-cells = <0>;
    reg_p3v3: regulator@0 {
        compatible = "regulator-fixed";
        [...]
        regulator-always-on;
    };
    [...]

Contrary to that, patches exist removing the 'regulators' node, because the 'simple-bus'
doesn't really exist in hardware. Unfortunately, the documentation is unclear about
wrapping regulator nodes like shown above.

Should I avoid the parent 'regulators' node?

Is the given naming schema in fixed-regulator.yaml best practice to follow?

    reg_xyz: regulator-xyz {
      compatible = "regulator-fixed";
      regulator-name = "xyz";

Thank you for clarification.

Carsten Stelling

Re: Voltage and current regulator: usage of 'regulators' parent node in device tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 284 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 01:09:25PM +0000, embedded (VIVAVIS AG) wrote:

> Should I avoid the parent 'regulators' node?

You should ask the DT maintainers, I don't really mind either way TBH.
My understanding was to avoid the parent node but can't remember why or
if it was important.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

AW: Voltage and current regulator: usage of 'regulators' parent node in device tree

[embedded (VIVAVIS AG)]

Hi Mark,

On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 05:30:00PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Should I avoid the parent 'regulators' node?
> 
> You should ask the DT maintainers, I don't really mind either way TBH.
> My understanding was to avoid the parent node but can't remember why or
> if it was important.

Thank you.

Carsten