Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] regulator: add device tree support for max8997

[Karol Lewandowski]

> > On 25.01.2012 12:22, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > The big problem there seems like specifying voltages in the first
> > > place, if we know what device it is we should already know what's
> > > going on.
>
> > Driver which handles said regulator might know what's going on, but
> > that might not be case for its consumers.  Should we limit ability to
> > query given parameter just because its value is hardcoded in hardware?
>
> I'm sorry, this makes no sense.  Setting a value in the constraints is
> not going to have any impact on the value reported by the driver, it
> never has.

... with the exception of fixed regulator, that is. This is from where I 
got my flawed understanding.

Looking at other drivers I see that's indeed special case not practiced 
elsewhere.

Thanks for explaining this.

Regards,
--
Karol Lewandowski | Samsung Poland R&D Center | Linux/Platform
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/