Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932295Ab2HFQQq (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:16:46 -0400 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:57086 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756429Ab2HFQQo (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:16:44 -0400 Message-ID: <501FEDE7.1060202@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 10:16:39 -0600 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Courbot CC: Mark Brown , Stephen Warren , Simon Glass , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 1/3] runtime interpreted power sequences References: <1343390750-3642-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <1343390750-3642-2-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <50170EA0.1010408@wwwdotorg.org> <501A338D.7080105@nvidia.com> <20120802082157.GA14866@avionic-0098.adnet.avionic-design.de> <20120802181111.GM4537@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <501B2642.4080805@nvidia.com> <20120804141155.GJ10523@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <501F2BAA.8000808@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: <501F2BAA.8000808@nvidia.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1294 Lines: 37 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/