Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751441Ab2HGFIT (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2012 01:08:19 -0400 Received: from hqemgate04.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.35]:18548 "EHLO hqemgate04.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750699Ab2HGFIR (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2012 01:08:17 -0400 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hqnvupgp06.nvidia.com on Mon, 06 Aug 2012 22:08:16 -0700 Message-ID: <5020A332.3010206@nvidia.com> Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 14:10:10 +0900 From: Alex Courbot Organization: NVIDIA User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Warren 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> <501FEDE7.1060202@wwwdotorg.org> In-Reply-To: <501FEDE7.1060202@wwwdotorg.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1692 Lines: 50 On 08/07/2012 01:16 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > 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. Right - having the phandles directly in the sequences has its merits, but logically speaking resources are related to a device, so this declarative approach is probably closer to reality anyway. I will revise the patch according to all the feedback received and submit a new version soon. Thanks, Alex. -- 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/