[PATCH/RFC v2] ARM: amba: Remove AMBA level regulator support

Linus Walleij linus.walleij at linaro.org
Sun Apr 1 15:22:50 EDT 2012


On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Mark Brown
<broonie at opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:

> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
> index ebc1e86..5be3248 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
> @@ -2788,6 +2788,7 @@ static struct regulator_init_data db8500_regulators[DB8500_NUM_REGULATORS] = {
>                .constraints = {
>                        .name = "db8500-vape",
>                        .valid_ops_mask = REGULATOR_CHANGE_STATUS,
> +                       .always_on = true,
>                },
>                .consumer_supplies = db8500_vape_consumers,
>                .num_consumer_supplies = ARRAY_SIZE(db8500_vape_consumers),

Combined with the PL022 patch this causes a power regression since
the PL022 is hereafter always on.

But I guess if I fix a power domain patch to accomplish much the
same things then nothing is really lost...

And I do like the change, if for nothing else so for the fact that it
eventually pushes to power domains what belongs there, so:
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij at linaro.org>

But to the defence: power domain code was not in the kernel
when the AMBA "vcore" regulator was introduced so how else
could we do it... except for inventing power domains...

Yours,
Linus Walleij



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list