From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756604Ab1JSOrn (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:47:43 -0400 Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:57399 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756468Ab1JSOrl (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:47:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:47:34 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Shawn Guo Cc: patches@linaro.org, tony@atomide.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Rajendra Nayak , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, lrg@ti.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] regulator: helper routine to extract regulator_init_data Message-ID: <20111019144734.GI18713@sirena.org.uk> References: <1318263578-7407-1-git-send-email-rnayak@ti.com> <1318263578-7407-4-git-send-email-rnayak@ti.com> <20111016145536.GA29885@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> <4E9BAC4D.3010402@ti.com> <20111018115836.GC30703@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> <20111018160046.GD28501@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20111019053354.GB31162@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111019053354.GB31162@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> X-Cookie: You now have Asian Flu. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cassiel.sirena.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 01:33:55PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 05:00:46PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > It's not just Linux-specific stuff, some of this is even specific to > > what current Linux drivers can do - updating the kernel could mean a > > different set of constraints. > Well, from what I see, the 'struct regulation_constraints' is defined > in machine.h and meant to be the regulator machine/board interface. ...which will depend on the system integrator's understanding of what their system is capable of right now. > With the example I'm looking at, mc13892, the regulation_constraints > configuration is fully passed from machine/board file. If there is > something specific to what drivers can do, it probably should be encoded > in regulator driver rather than staying in regulation_constraints. I don't think you're quite understanding the issue - it's an integration problem with three different variables. It's a combination of what the chips can do, what the drivers can do and if the board design affects any of this stuff. Only the board can come to a final decision.