lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support
From
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/

\
 
 \ /
  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