Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 1/3] runtime interpreted power sequences

[Stephen Warren]

On 08/05/2012 08:27 PM, Alex Courbot wrote:
> On 08/04/2012 11:12 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 10:15:46AM +0900, Alex Courbot wrote:
>>> On Fri 03 Aug 2012 03:11:12 AM JST, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>>> I missed some of the earlier bits of the thread here but why can't
>>>> we do
>>>> device based lookups?
...
> I think we only have two choices for this:
> 
> 1) Stick to the scheme where resources are declared at the device level,
> such as they can be referenced by name in the sub-nodes (basically what
> I did in this patch):
> 
> backlight {
>      compatible = "pwm-backlight";
>      ...
>      backlight-supply = <&backlight_reg>;
> 
>      power-on-sequence {
>          step@0 {
>              regulator = "backlight";
>              enable;
>          };
> 
> This would translate by a get_regulator(dev, "backlight") in the code
> which would be properly resolved.

Yes, upon reflection, that scheme does make sense. I withdraw the
comments I made re: whether it'd be better to just stick the phandles
into the steps.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/