Re: [PATCH 1/4] OMAP: DSS2: Remove suspicous and unused TAAL regulator API usage
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:23:27PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 14:21 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:11:00PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > > > I've already applied this and the three other patches that you sent in > > > March to my omapdss tree. Have there been any changes? > > No, it's a resend - if you've applied these changes they're not showing > > up in -next. > Yes, I seem to have forgotten to update my for-next branch. I'll do it > right away. Great, thanks! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] OMAP: DSS2: Remove suspicous and unused TAAL regulator API usage
On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 14:21 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:11:00PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > > > I've already applied this and the three other patches that you sent in > > March to my omapdss tree. Have there been any changes? > > No, it's a resend - if you've applied these changes they're not showing > up in -next. Yes, I seem to have forgotten to update my for-next branch. I'll do it right away. Tomi signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [PATCH 1/4] OMAP: DSS2: Remove suspicous and unused TAAL regulator API usage
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:11:00PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > I've already applied this and the three other patches that you sent in > March to my omapdss tree. Have there been any changes? No, it's a resend - if you've applied these changes they're not showing up in -next. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] OMAP: DSS2: Remove suspicous and unused TAAL regulator API usage
Hi, On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 11:57 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > The TAAL driver contains some regulator support which is currently unused > (the code is there but the one panel supported by the driver doesn't have > any regulators provided). This code mostly looks like an open coded > version of the regulator core bulk API. > > The only additional feature is that a voltage range can be set once when > the device is opened, though this is never varied at runtime. The general > expectation is that if the device is not actively managing the voltage of > the device (eg, doing DVFS) then any configuration will be done using the > constraints rather than by drivers, saving them code and ensuring that > they work well with systems where the voltage is not configurable. > > If systems are added needing regulator support this can be added back in, > though it should be based on core features rather than open coding things. I've already applied this and the three other patches that you sent in March to my omapdss tree. Have there been any changes? Tomi signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
