RE: [PATCH v4 1/2] regulator: act8945a: add regulator driver for ACT8945A

[Yang, Wenyou]

Hi Mark,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 2016年1月29日 8:16
> To: Yang, Wenyou <Wenyou.Yang@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@xxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@xxxxxxx>; Ian Campbell
> <ijc+devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Javier Martinez Canillas
> <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>; Peter Korsgaard
> <jacmet@xxxxxxxxx>; Ferre, Nicolas <Nicolas.FERRE@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-arm-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] regulator: act8945a: add regulator driver for
> ACT8945A
> 
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:57:42AM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote:
> 
> > +static const struct of_device_id act8945a_pmic_of_match[] = {
> > +	{ .compatible = "active-semi,act8945a-regulator" },
> > +	{ },
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, act8945a_pmic_of_match);
> 
> This seems mostly OK but why do we have a compatible string here - shouldn't
> the MFD be able to instantiate the regulator function without needing this?

Because I got feedback from Javier for the act8945a-charger patches of this MFD series,
He said missing the OF match table will cause the module autoloading broken. 

http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-January/398113.html

What do you think about it?


Best Regards,
Wenyou Yang