On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 03:14:04PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On pią, 2014-11-28 at 11:38 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > This sort of thing is a sign that we're not saving much by moving the
> > parsing to the core and perhaps there's more flexiblity here...
> The driver receive callbacks
On pią, 2014-11-28 at 11:38 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:30:55AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On czw, 2014-11-27 at 18:43 +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Why do we need some special magic operation for GPIO based enables
> > > that's separate to any other enable
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:30:55AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On czw, 2014-11-27 at 18:43 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Why do we need some special magic operation for GPIO based enables
> > that's separate to any other enable operation? This seems really
> > confusing, if the constraint
On czw, 2014-11-27 at 18:43 +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:20:50PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > Use ena_gpio from regulator constraints (filled by parsing generic
> > bindings) to initialize the GPIO enable control. Support also the old
> > way: ena_gpio supplied in
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:20:50PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Use ena_gpio from regulator constraints (filled by parsing generic
> bindings) to initialize the GPIO enable control. Support also the old
> way: ena_gpio supplied in regulator_config structure.
>
> This also adds a new set_ena
5 matches
Mail list logo
