On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 01:10:12PM +, anson.hu...@freescale.com wrote:
> > In any case I'd be much happier with this patch if it implemented the
> > enable and disable operations as well.
> understand now. then maybe I should remove the PU check in cpufreq,
> although setting PU LDO if it is
Sent from Anson's iPhone
> 在 2013年12月17日，21:00，"Mark Brown" 写道：
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:38:33PM +, anson.hu...@freescale.com wrote:
>
>>> better to add the error checking there wouldn't it?
>
>> Okay, than what about other functions? there is such condition check
>> there is other
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:38:33PM +, anson.hu...@freescale.com wrote:
> > better to add the error checking there wouldn't it?
> Okay, than what about other functions? there is such condition check
> there is other functions too, that is why I add it here. if you think
> it is no necessary, I
Sent from Anson's iPhone
> 在 2013年12月17日，20:29，"Mark Brown" 写道：
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 02:38:56AM +, anson.hu...@freescale.com wrote:
>
> Please fix the line length you're using to word wrap, it should be less
> than 80 columns to make your mails readable.
>
+if (!anatop_re
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 02:38:56AM +, anson.hu...@freescale.com wrote:
Please fix the line length you're using to word wrap, it should be less
than 80 columns to make your mails readable.
> >> + if (!anatop_reg->control_reg)
> >> + return -ENOTSUPP;
> >In what situation would this
58 AM
>To: Huang Yongcai-B20788
>Cc: lgirdw...@gmail.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: anatop: add is_enabled interface
>
>On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 04:20:27PM -0500, Anson Huang wrote:
>
>> +{
>> +struct anatop_regulator *anatop_reg =
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 04:20:27PM -0500, Anson Huang wrote:
> +{
> + struct anatop_regulator *anatop_reg = rdev_get_drvdata(reg);
> + u32 val;
> +
> + if (!anatop_reg->control_reg)
> + return -ENOTSUPP;
In what situation would this happen and why would the operation be
pr
7 matches
Mail list logo
