Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 11:52:13 +0200 (CEST)
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: extend the fixed voltage regulator to accept
 voltage
In-Reply-To: <20120618094145.GC3974@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206181145520.23884@axis700.grange>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206181017360.23884@axis700.grange>
 <20120618094145.GC3974@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1318
Lines: 35

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:19:42AM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> 
> > +#define FIXED_BASE "fixed-dummy"
> > +#define FIXED_NAME FIXED_BASE "-00"
> > +
> >  struct fixed_regulator_data {
> >  	struct fixed_voltage_config cfg;
> >  	struct regulator_init_data init_data;
> >  	struct platform_device pdev;
> > +	char name[sizeof(FIXED_NAME)];
> 
> So, this looks pretty ugly and doesn't seem terribly directly related to
> supplying a voltage parameter.  Please split it out into a separate
> change.

Well, I never insist on being the most advanced aesthetics connaisseur, 
but I think these two changes are related. The point is, that if we want 
to support different voltages, boards will have several of these 
regulators, therefore they'll need different names. We could splt this, 
but just the first part - changing the name - would look kinda pointless 
without the second one, don't you think?

Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/