On 29/07/15 23:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:

On 07/28/2015 05:54 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:

quoted

+
+        panel_3p3v: panel_3p3v {
+            compatible = "regulator-fixed";
+            pinctrl-0 = <&disp_en_gpios>;
+            pinctrl-names = "default";
+            regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>;
+            regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>;
+            regulator-name = "panel_en_3p3v";
+            regulator-type = "voltage";
+            startup-delay-us = <0>;
+            gpio = <&pm8921_gpio 36 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
+            enable-active-high;
+            regulator-boot-on;
+        };

We should put gpio regulators into their own container in the root of
the tree. Similar to what was done for 8960 gpio regulators.

I agree, Will do this in next version.

quoted

+
+        backlight: backlight{
+            pinctrl-0 = <&pwm_bl_gpios>;
+            pinctrl-names = "default";
+            compatible = "gpio-backlight";
+            gpios = <&pm8921_gpio 26 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
+            default-on;
+        };
+
+        panel: auo,b101xtn01 {
+            status = "okay";
+            compatible = "auo,b101xtn01";
+
+            ddc-i2c-bus = <&i2c3>;
+            backlight = <&backlight>;
+            power-supply = <&panel_3p3v>;
          };

These two nodes shouldn't be under the SoC node. They don't have
registers so they should be at the root of the tree. And we don't need
to put labels twice on nodes. If we're modifying things in board
specific dtsi files it should be fine to leave the label off if the
label is in the SoC dtsi file.

Yep, will fix it in next version.