On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 06:48:15PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 09:58:52AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 11:18:06AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 11:50:28AM +0200, Antonio Ospite wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

A little more background: we need pxamci to be a child of SPI because
our PMIC is connected via SPI, and a PMIC regulator is used for mmc
powering; enforcing this hierarchy is needed to make pxamci suspend and
resume properly.

quoted

quoted

I don't think this is the right solution - and I don't know what the
right solution would be given that the interfaces I suspect you need
aren't public.

quoted

Um, why not ask the SPI maintainer?  I don't know what the SPI code is
doing, sorry.

It's not specific to SPI - the problem is the need to express ordering
constraints in suspend/resume that go beyond what the device tree gives.

I believe that the pm_link stuff in -next is what's needed here?  I was
planning to look at this within the regulator API before the next merge
window so that I can hopefully have something ready for -next after that
(or possibly even get it in in the same merge window if the cross tree
issues aren't too painful).

Yes, talk to Rafael about that stuff, he's responsible for it :)

thanks,

greg k-h