lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] regulator: palmas: use correct device node for DT parsing
On Friday 01 March 2013 12:09 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:23:42PM +0000, Graeme Gregory wrote:
>> On 27/02/13 14:10, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>> When device is registered through the DT then regulators node
>>> exist in the parent device node of regulator driver. Hence passing
>>> parent device node for parsing DT in place of self-device node
>>> which is typically NULL.
>>> - struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
>>> + struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.parent->of_node;
>> This is not correct, nor is the reasoning.
>> I suspect your previous patch broke DT probing so your not getting nodes
>> filled in.
> So, the reason that this pattern has generally been followed is so that
> the regulator core can do the equivalent of regulator_get(dev, supply)
> to find the supplies. Using the parent device there is particularly
> important in non-DT systems so that we can map the child regulator
> supply in by using the dev_name() of the parent rather than the MFD
> internal subdevice name but for pure DT systems where it's all just
> direct links it's less of an issue.
>
>

If I make the dts file as
#gpio-cells = <2>;
gpio-controller;

palmas_pmic {
compatible = "ti,palmas-pmic";
ti,ldo6_vibrator = <0>;

regulators {
:::::::::::::
}
}


then regulator get registered properly.
And hence this patch is not require here.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-03-01 14:22    [W:0.045 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site