On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 09:36 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> Liam Girdwood wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 14:48 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> >> On Friday 06 March 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> >>> Would it make sense to make this platform data so that if a given board
> >>> requires running the chip like this it can be enabled for those boards
> >>> but it's not something people might turn on because it seems useful?
> >> Let's hear if it's actually needed, first.  :)
> >>
> >> I coded those tables so that it would be easy to kick in the
> >> support for out-of-spec operation if it's really needed.  But
> >> so far we don't know that it's needed, and I'd rather it not
> >> be too easy to run like that.
> >>
> > 
> > I've now reverted this patch. 
> 
> TI say we can use VAUX3 at 3V and expect no problems:
> 
> http://community.ti.com/forums/p/3777/14574.aspx
> 
> So how do we do it?

I'd prefer seeing the reply from Ghandar to David's last question before
accepting this patch again. It's still not 100% clear from TI, things
seem a little bit muddled as to whether 3V will be guaranteed to work on
*all* shipped devices.

Thanks

Liam

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to