Groups > linux.kernel > #1192948

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mfd: max77686: Don't suggest in binding to use a deprecated property

From	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mfd: max77686: Don't suggest in binding to use a deprecated property
Date	2015-07-27 12:40 +0200
Message-ID	<pQNZ7-7ou-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<pN7tn-5UK-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pN7tn-5UK-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <pOesO-3Zl-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <pOgkV-6FE-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <pQNPt-7dH-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:28:07PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 07/20/2015 12:12 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:

> > This PMIC uses a single I2C address for all the regulators and these are
> > controlled by writing to different I2C register addresses. So the regulator
> > nodes don't have a reg property in this case.

> > By looking at other regulators bindings, besides the generic regulator.txt
> > and fixed-regulator.txt DT bindings, there are only 5 (out of 40) that use
> > the node-name@unit-address convention mentioned in the ePAPR document.

> > AFAICT all these are for regulators that are actually in different addresses
> > but I could be wrong so let's see what Mark says.

> Any opinions on this?

I just don't care, this is just syntactic noise which has no practical
meaning as far as I can tell.

Thread

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mfd: max77686: Don't suggest in binding to use a  deprecated property Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com> - 2015-07-27 12:30 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mfd: max77686: Don't suggest in binding to use a  deprecated property Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2015-07-27 12:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mfd: max77686: Don't suggest in binding to use a  deprecated property Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com> - 2015-07-27 12:50 +0200

csiph-web