Re: [PATCH] mfd: core: introduce of_node_name for mfd sub devices

[Lee Jones]

> >> And regulator driver should get the regulator node by their
> >> pdev->dev.of_node.
> >> Currently, in most of driver, we are having the code on regulator
> >> driver to get "regulators" node from parent node which I want to
> >> avoid.
> > 
> > Ah, I see. Yes, I believe the regulators should have their own node,
> 
> The use of a "regulators" node to keep all the regulator configuration
> in one place seems fine...
> 
> > complete with a compatible string.
> 
> ... but I see not reason why that node has to have a separate compatible
> property, or /has/ to have a separate driver.
> 
> I think having a compatible value in this node would only be required if
> the HW block that implements those registers is actually expected to be
> shared between n different chips, and hence it's likely that you'd get
> re-use out of a separate binding, driver, etc.
> 
> It's perfectly reasonable for the regulator MFD driver to know that the
> binding for the top-level PMIC node has a regulators child node, and go
> find it by name, and read whatever properties/nodes it needs directly
> out of it. Writing code that way in no ways implies a need for a
> compatible value.

Sounds fine.

> > To have each regulator listed
> > separately in the parent node seems a little messy. Just out of
> > interest, how many regulators are we talking about here?

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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/