Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 1 Apr 2012 21:22:50 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support | From | Linus Walleij <> |
| |
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c > index ebc1e86..5be3248 100644 > --- a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c > +++ b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c > @@ -2788,6 +2788,7 @@ static struct regulator_init_data db8500_regulators[DB8500_NUM_REGULATORS] = { > .constraints = { > .name = "db8500-vape", > .valid_ops_mask = REGULATOR_CHANGE_STATUS, > + .always_on = true, > }, > .consumer_supplies = db8500_vape_consumers, > .num_consumer_supplies = ARRAY_SIZE(db8500_vape_consumers),
Combined with the PL022 patch this causes a power regression since the PL022 is hereafter always on.
But I guess if I fix a power domain patch to accomplish much the same things then nothing is really lost...
And I do like the change, if for nothing else so for the fact that it eventually pushes to power domains what belongs there, so: Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
But to the defence: power domain code was not in the kernel when the AMBA "vcore" regulator was introduced so how else could we do it... except for inventing power domains...
Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |