From: marex@denx.de (Marek Vasut)
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 22:35:05 +0100
Subject: [PATCH V4 6/9] ARM: mxs: Provide regulator to pwm-backlight
In-Reply-To: <643E69AA4436674C8F39DCC2C05F7638629CD2FDF4@HQMAIL03.nvidia.com>
References: <1363719573-20926-1-git-send-email-achew@nvidia.com>
 <201303192227.21717.marex@denx.de>
 <643E69AA4436674C8F39DCC2C05F7638629CD2FDF4@HQMAIL03.nvidia.com>
Message-ID: <201303192235.06137.marex@denx.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Dear Andrew Chew,

> > Dear Andrew Chew,
> > 
> > > The pwm-backlight driver now takes a mandatory regulator that is
> > > gotten during driver probe.  Initialize a dummy regulator to satisfy
> > > this requirement.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Chew <achew@nvidia.com>
> > 
> > Do we really need a mandatory regulator? Why can't it be optional?
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Marek Vasut
> 
> Because for those using board setup code (and not devicetree), it was
> not possible to distinguish between opting out of the regulator, and
> deferred probe, without adding something to the platform data that
> board setup code needed to fill in anyway.

Sure, but this adds a bit of overhead for the DT platforms, no?

Other than this curiosity, I have no problems with this stuff.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut