On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 20:40:26 +0000 Mark Brown <broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 09:25:21PM +0100, Antonio Ospite wrote:
> > Mark Brown <broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
>
> > > There's no need to do this since the regulator API matches consumers
> > > based on struct device as well as name so you can have as many LEDs as
> > > you like all using the same supply name mapping to different regulators.
>
> > I need some more explanation here, I am currently using the driver with
> > this code:
>
> > +/* VVIB: Vibrator on A780, A1200, A910, E6, E2 */
> > +static struct regulator_consumer_supply pcap_regulator_VVIB_consumers
> > [] = {
> > + { .dev_name = "leds-regulator", .supply = "vibrator", },
>
> So you're instantiating the device with .id set to -1 (as your code
> below shows), meaning there's only one leds-regulator in the system and
> there's no need to number them. If you had more than one of them then
> you'd number them and then have something like:
>
> { .dev_name = "leds-regulator.0", supply = "vled" },
> { .dev_name = "leds-regulator.1", supply = "vled" },
>
> when setting up the supplies.
>
Ok, the .id in .dev_name is what I was missing.
> > If I set the .supply value fixed, how can I assign different
> > regulators to different leds? Should I use the address to the platform
> > device (a780_vibrator in this case) for .dev when defining the
> > regulator in the first place?
>
> There is no need to use the .dev field, that is kept to avoid build
> breakage transitioning to dev_name.
Now everything is clear.
Thanks,
Antonio
--
Antonio Ospite
http://ao2.it
PGP public key ID: 0x4553B001
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
pgpWGZuaSvggE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
