Re: [PATCH] regulator: palmas: use correct device node for DT parsing

[Laxman Dewangan]

On Friday 01 March 2013 12:09 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 02:23:42PM +0000, Graeme Gregory wrote:
> > On 27/02/13 14:10, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> > > When device is registered through the DT then regulators node
> > > exist in the parent device node of regulator driver. Hence passing
> > > parent device node for parsing DT in place of self-device node
> > > which is typically NULL.
> > > -	struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > > +	struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.parent->of_node;
> > This is not correct, nor is the reasoning.
> > I suspect your previous patch broke DT probing so your not getting nodes
> > filled in.
> So, the reason that this pattern has generally been followed is so that
> the regulator core can do the equivalent of regulator_get(dev, supply)
> to find the supplies.  Using the parent device there is particularly
> important in non-DT systems so that we can map the child regulator
> supply in by using the dev_name() of the parent rather than the MFD
> internal subdevice name but for pure DT systems where it's all just
> direct links it's less of an issue.

If I make the dts file as
                        #gpio-cells = <2>;
                        gpio-controller;

                       palmas_pmic {
                               compatible = "ti,palmas-pmic";
                               ti,ldo6_vibrator = <0>;

                               regulators {
                                    :::::::::::::
                                }
                        }


then regulator get registered properly.
And hence this patch is not require here.

--
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/