lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: Add brcm,bcm63xx-regulator device tree binding
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 11:51:16PM +0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
> On 03/12/15 23:45, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Are you *sure* these are regulators and not power domains? These names
> > look a lot like they could be power domains.

> No, I'm not sure. Some of them are may actually be regulators (the "PHY"
> ones) while others are almost definitely power domains (like the "FAP"
> Forwarding Assist Processor).

OK, so the power domains should be being represented and managed as such
rather than using regulators - it's a better fit (doing things like
support atomic context) and it also sidesteps this. For the things that
you say are clearly regulators should we have more information about
those?
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-12-04 12:21    [W:0.057 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site