Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Jun 2012 13:09:16 +0530 | From | Laxman Dewangan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] ARM: dts: db8500: add node property "regulator-compatible" regulator node |
| |
On Wednesday 20 June 2012 12:39 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On 19/06/12 18:32, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 06/19/2012 10:13 AM, Lee Jones wrote: >>>> On 19/06/12 15:28, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>>>> Device's regulator matches their hardware counterparts with the >>>>>> property "regulator-compatible" of each child regulator node in >>>>>> place of the child node. >>>>>> Add the property "regulator-compatible" for each regulator with >>>>>> their name. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan<ldewangan@nvidia.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> Changes from V1: >>>>>> - This is new change in V2. >>>>>> >>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/db8500.dtsi | 128 >>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- >>>>>> 1 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/db8500.dtsi >>>>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/db8500.dtsi >>>>>> index 4ad5160..9548f80 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/db8500.dtsi >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/db8500.dtsi >>>>>> @@ -203,107 +203,149 @@ >>>>>> >>>>>> db8500-prcmu-regulators { >>>>>> compatible = "stericsson,db8500-prcmu-regulator"; >>>>>> + #address-cells =<1>; >>>>>> + #size-cells =<0>; >>>> Why are these and the reg properties required? >> DT nodes should be named after the type of object they describe (e.g. >> "regulator") rather than the name of the object they're describing (e.g. >> "vape"). >> >> Once you've made that change, you end up with many nodes with the same >> name in the same parent, so you need to make their names unique. You do >> this by adding a "unit address" to each of them - "@0", "@1", ... But, >> in order to be "allowed" to use such a unit address, you need a reg >> property that matches the unit address, and #address-cells/#size-cells >> in the parent node. > I don't like it. By doing this you are preventing any regulator from > being registered by of_platform_populate(). Also, the nodes are already > placed under an identifying node "db8500-prcmu-regulators", so we know > they are regulators, making the regulator@x, the reg property and the > *-cells properties unnecessary cruft. > > I'd prefer to have the second label removed and just to call the > regulators by their correct name. The property names become functionally > redundant after the previous patch has been applied in any case. > > Something like this: > >> db8500-prcmu-regulators { >> compatible = "stericsson,db8500-prcmu-regulator"; >> >> // DB8500_REGULATOR_VAPE >> - db8500_vape_reg: db8500_vape { >> + db8500_vape { >> + regulator-compatible = "db8500_vape"; >> regulator-name = "db8500-vape"; >> regulator-always-on; >> }; >
You will require a label so that it can refer by the consumer.
| |