On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 02:01:03PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:14:43PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
>
> > So, what do you think about DT like below?
>
> > sky81452@2c {
> > compatible = "skyworks,sky81452";
> > reg = <0x2c>;
> >
> > backlight {
> >
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 02:01:03PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:14:43PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
So, what do you think about DT like below?
sky81452@2c {
compatible = skyworks,sky81452;
reg = 0x2c;
backlight {
compatible =
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:14:43PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> So, what do you think about DT like below?
> sky81452@2c {
> compatible = "skyworks,sky81452";
> reg = <0x2c>;
>
> backlight {
> compatible = "skyworks,sky81452-backlight";
> name =
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:14:43PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
So, what do you think about DT like below?
sky81452@2c {
compatible = skyworks,sky81452;
reg = 0x2c;
backlight {
compatible = skyworks,sky81452-backlight;
name = pwm-backlight;
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:27:23AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:10:24PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 04:26:05PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > The thing I'm seeing is that the binding for your device with the
> > > subnode looks very much like
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:10:24PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 04:26:05PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> > The thing I'm seeing is that the binding for your device with the
> > subnode looks very much like the device trees of devices with multiple
> > regulators. The fact
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:27:23AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:10:24PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 04:26:05PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
The thing I'm seeing is that the binding for your device with the
subnode looks very much like the device
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:10:24PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 04:26:05PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
The thing I'm seeing is that the binding for your device with the
subnode looks very much like the device trees of devices with multiple
regulators. The fact that you
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 04:26:05PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 07:43:09PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
>
> > Are you talking about simplification using of_regulator_match()?
> > This driver has only one regulator.
> > Is the API also useful for this driver?
>
> The thing I'm
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 04:26:05PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 07:43:09PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
Are you talking about simplification using of_regulator_match()?
This driver has only one regulator.
Is the API also useful for this driver?
The thing I'm seeing is
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 07:43:09PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> Are you talking about simplification using of_regulator_match()?
> This driver has only one regulator.
> Is the API also useful for this driver?
The thing I'm seeing is that the binding for your device with the
subnode looks very
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:17:34PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 06:19:50PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
>
> > Wow. I understand.
> > I missed .supply_name. I think I need something like
> > below, before devm_regulator_register().
>
> > config->supply_name =
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 06:19:50PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> Wow. I understand.
> I missed .supply_name. I think I need something like
> below, before devm_regulator_register().
> config->supply_name = init_data->constraints.name;
> I will resubmit it.
No, not supply_name (though you
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:56:06AM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:11:12AM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:35:12PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > If you're doing anything here you should convert the code to use the
> > > simplified interface for
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:56:06AM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:11:12AM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:35:12PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
If you're doing anything here you should convert the code to use the
simplified interface for parsing
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 06:19:50PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
Wow. I understand.
I missed .supply_name. I think I need something like
below, before devm_regulator_register().
config-supply_name = init_data-constraints.name;
I will resubmit it.
No, not supply_name (though you really
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:17:34PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 06:19:50PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
Wow. I understand.
I missed .supply_name. I think I need something like
below, before devm_regulator_register().
config-supply_name =
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 07:43:09PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
Are you talking about simplification using of_regulator_match()?
This driver has only one regulator.
Is the API also useful for this driver?
The thing I'm seeing is that the binding for your device with the
subnode looks very much
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:11:12AM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:35:12PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> > If you're doing anything here you should convert the code to use the
> > simplified interface for parsing regulator data based on putting the
> > subnode name and
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:11:12AM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:35:12PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
If you're doing anything here you should convert the code to use the
simplified interface for parsing regulator data based on putting the
subnode name and regualtor name
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:35:12PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:47:41PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
>
> > - np = of_get_child_by_name(dev->parent->of_node, "regulator");
> > - if (unlikely(!np)) {
> > + if (!np) {
> > dev_err(dev, "regulator node not
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:47:41PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
> - np = of_get_child_by_name(dev->parent->of_node, "regulator");
> - if (unlikely(!np)) {
> + if (!np) {
> dev_err(dev, "regulator node not found");
> - return NULL;
> + return
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:47:41PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
- np = of_get_child_by_name(dev-parent-of_node, regulator);
- if (unlikely(!np)) {
+ if (!np) {
dev_err(dev, regulator node not found);
- return NULL;
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENODATA);
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:35:12PM +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 02:47:41PM +0900, Gyungoh Yoo wrote:
- np = of_get_child_by_name(dev-parent-of_node, regulator);
- if (unlikely(!np)) {
+ if (!np) {
dev_err(dev, regulator node not found);
-
Signed-off-by: Gyungoh Yoo
---
Changes v4:
Removed MODULE_VERSION()
Modified license to GPLv2
Changes v3:
Modified to return ENODATA when of_node is NULL
Modified the messages in error cases
Changes v2:
Added 'compatible' attribute in the driver
Added message for exception or errors.
Signed-off-by: Gyungoh Yoo jack@skyworksinc.com
---
Changes v4:
Removed MODULE_VERSION()
Modified license to GPLv2
Changes v3:
Modified to return ENODATA when of_node is NULL
Modified the messages in error cases
Changes v2:
Added 'compatible' attribute in the driver
Added message for
26 matches
Mail list logo
