From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753522AbcD0Pyz (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:54:55 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49815 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752249AbcD0Pyy (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:54:54 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Allow use of "status = disabled" in regulator dts nodes To: Maxime Ripard , Mark Brown References: <1461765825-15915-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <1461765825-15915-2-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20160427142432.GR3217@sirena.org.uk> <20160427143711.GT3217@sirena.org.uk> <20160427150108.GU3217@sirena.org.uk> <20160427155009.GB17159@lukather> <780af88d-a14a-f527-fe0a-1bb50cddc216@redhat.com> Cc: Liam Girdwood , Chen-Yu Tsai , Linux Kernel Mailing List From: Hans de Goede Message-ID: <5a4e35e8-2868-4c1f-7503-eeab7e30c9ee@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 17:54:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <780af88d-a14a-f527-fe0a-1bb50cddc216@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 27-04-16 17:52, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 27-04-16 17:50, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 04:01:08PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 04:40:05PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>> >>>> Or, since regulator_of_get_init_data uses for_each_available_child_of_node >>>> which checks the "status" value we can actually already use >>>> "status=disabled" cool. So this simply already works :) >>> >>> To repeat you really shouldn't have *any* DT nodes for regulators that >>> aren't in use, there should be nothing to put in their nodes. If >>> there's anything there that's a sign that your DT has problems. >> >> How should we deal with regulators that are on by default but are not >> used in the system then? > > I think we've already solved that one, we do list them, thereby giving the > regulator core permission to touch them and then let the regulator core > turn them off for us. To clarify, I do not believe that this is not about not having nodes for unused regulators, but about not having nodes for regulators which should not be touched. Regards, Hans