On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:39:49PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
> > I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
> > and happy with it. Is it OK to take via ARM SoC with dependent and other
> > SCMI changes ?
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
> and happy with it. Is it OK to take via ARM SoC with dependent and other
> SCMI changes ? Or we can merge the SCMI part next release and the regulator
> in the
On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 04:13:08PM +, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:14PM +, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> > Add a simple regulator based on SCMI Voltage Domain Protocol.
> >
>
> I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
> and ha
Hi Mark,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 12:34:14PM +, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> Add a simple regulator based on SCMI Voltage Domain Protocol.
>
I was thinking about how to merge this if and when you have reviewed it
and happy with it. Is it OK to take via ARM SoC with dependent and other
SCMI change
Add a simple regulator based on SCMI Voltage Domain Protocol.
Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi
v3 --> v4
- using of_match_full_name core regulator flag
- avoid coccinelle falde complaints about pointer-sized allocations
v2 --> v3
- remove multiple linear mappings support
- removed duplicated
5 matches
Mail list logo
