[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Mark Brown
<> 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 <>

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...

Linus Walleij
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-01 21:25    [W:0.110 / U:1.520 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site