From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:63722 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752022Ab0LMOlO (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:41:14 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Call into regulator driver only when voltage min/max really changes. From: Liam Girdwood In-Reply-To: <1292151342-12970-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org> References: <1292151342-12970-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:41:10 +0000 Message-ID: <1292251270.3320.79.camel@odin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Saravana Kannan Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 02:55 -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote: > Even in cases where the consumer driver calls the regulator core with > different voltage min/max values, the application of the various > voltage constraints could result in the min/max voltage values passed > to the regulator driver to be unchanged since the previous invocation. > > Optimize these cases by not calling into the regulator driver and not > sending incorrect/unnecessary voltage change notifications. > > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan This doesn't apply. Any chance you could regenerate against the regulator for-next branch ? Thanks Liam -- Freelance Developer, SlimLogic Ltd ASoC and Voltage Regulator Maintainer. http://www.slimlogic.co.uk