[PATCH 8/9] regulator: helper to extract regulator node based on supply name

[Grant Likely]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 03:04:45PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 September 2011 05:56 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:09:30AM +0200, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> >>On 9/27/2011 8:59 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> >>>I'm not sure how this should work in a device tree world, I'd *hope*
> >>>we'd get a device tree node for the CPU and could then just make this a
> >>>regular consumer thing but then the cpufreq drivers would need to be
> >>>updated to make use of it.  The only reason we allow null devices right
> >>>now is the fact that cpufreq doesn't have a struct device it can use.
> >
> >>That's why we do have a MPU node in OMAP dts, in order to build an
> >>omap_device that will be mainly used for the DVFS on the MPU.
> >
> >>And even before DT migration, we used to build statically some
> >>omap_device to represent the various processors in the system (MPU,
> >>DSP, CortexM3...).
> >
> >Yeah, but that's very OMAP specific - we don't have that in general (in
> >fact it's the only Linux platform I'm aware of that has a device for the
> >CPU).
> 
> But isn't this the right thing to do for everyone else too?
> 

It is normal to have nodes for each CPU.  The /cpus/ node normally
contains cpu@* nodes for each logical cpu core, and I would expect
nodes for each additional DSP and MPU core.  Whether or not they
belong in the /cpus/ node is a matter of design (we don't have any
patterns for that yet).

g.