From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@goldelico.com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
Graeme Gregory <gg@slimlogic.co.uk>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@openphoenux.org>,
kernel@pyra-handheld.com,
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: palmas: set supply_name after registering the regulator
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 21:08:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210630200840.GJ5106@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54FC87BA-D45A-4ABF-B233-2A70B4A4A632@goldelico.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1167 bytes --]
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 07:17:28PM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Splitting into many regulators also needs to touch the device trees
> to have individual compatible entries which currently do not exist.
No, it doesn't. There's absolutely no need for any specific mapping
between Linux devices and compatible strings or nodes in the DT, we can
create any number of Linux devices for any number of compatibles - just
look at MFDs (where we create multiple Linux devices for a single DT
compatible string) or system devices (where we create Linux devices with
potentially no node in the device tree).
> On the other hand, a theoretical system could have a real fixed regulator
> in between (maybe a power switch?) and should still work. Why should
> driver core care about that case and not the core system it is using?
For deferred probe to be guaranteed to work we really should have one
regulator per Linux device but in practice that is overhead and effort
that almost never buys us anything in practical systems (I can't
emphasize strongly enough how unusual chains of more than two regulators
are) so we don't enforce doing that.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-30 20:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-29 15:24 H. Nikolaus Schaller
2021-06-29 15:59 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-29 18:34 ` H. Nikolaus Schaller
2021-06-29 18:56 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-29 20:21 ` H. Nikolaus Schaller
2021-06-29 20:26 ` Graeme Gregory
2021-06-30 12:13 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-30 12:29 ` H. Nikolaus Schaller
2021-06-30 13:04 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-30 14:43 ` H. Nikolaus Schaller
2021-06-30 16:45 ` Mark Brown
2021-06-30 17:17 ` H. Nikolaus Schaller
2021-06-30 20:08 ` Mark Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210630200840.GJ5106@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=gg@slimlogic.co.uk \
--cc=hns@goldelico.com \
--cc=kernel@pyra-handheld.com \
--cc=letux-kernel@openphoenux.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=peter.ujfalusi@gmail.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®