From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
To: Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, vapier@gentoo.org,
khilman@deeprootsystems.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, eric.y.miao@gmail.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Input: Make ADS7846 independent on regulator
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 10:21:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201010051021.30496.marek.vasut@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CAACA63.6090202@compulab.co.il>
Dne Út 5. října 2010 08:49:07 Igor Grinberg napsal(a):
> On 09/09/10 12:41, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 10:27:17AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> Dne Út 7. září 2010 14:53:35 Mark Brown napsal(a):
> >>> From a regulator API usage point of view a separate implementation of
> >>> the same thing was nacked - there are regulator API facilties for
> >>> hiding missing regulators from drivers when needed to get systems
> >>> going, unless the device genuinely can cope without supplies it should
> >>> be relying on those.
>
> I actually, don't see why ads7846 is strictly relying on the regulator
> and I don't understand, why ads7846 driver has to bail out if the regulator
> is not found? Why shouldn't the driver try to continue?
> I think it should bail out only in case communicating with the device
> failed.
Well, I can't but agree ... it's unnecessary crud indeed.
>
> >> Maybe these platforms should have been fixed prior to applying the patch
> >> adding regulator goo into ads7846 driver then. What's the way to go now
> >> then ?
> >
> > Fix the platforms and use the dummy regulators to keep them going until
> > that happens. It's trivial to do the hookup in the platforms.
>
> You want each platform, that does not have a special regulated power supply
> for the ads7846, to define a dummy regulator just to cope with that
> artificial dependency of the device driver?
You can enable some option in the regulator stuff that automagically shoves in a
dummy regulator, but it's still additional crud.
> I think it is a waste and big code duplication in each platform
> that does not have that special regulator.
Indeed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: marek.vasut@gmail.com (Marek Vasut)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] Input: Make ADS7846 independent on regulator
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 10:21:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201010051021.30496.marek.vasut@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CAACA63.6090202@compulab.co.il>
Dne ?t 5. ??jna 2010 08:49:07 Igor Grinberg napsal(a):
> On 09/09/10 12:41, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 10:27:17AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> Dne ?t 7. z??? 2010 14:53:35 Mark Brown napsal(a):
> >>> From a regulator API usage point of view a separate implementation of
> >>> the same thing was nacked - there are regulator API facilties for
> >>> hiding missing regulators from drivers when needed to get systems
> >>> going, unless the device genuinely can cope without supplies it should
> >>> be relying on those.
>
> I actually, don't see why ads7846 is strictly relying on the regulator
> and I don't understand, why ads7846 driver has to bail out if the regulator
> is not found? Why shouldn't the driver try to continue?
> I think it should bail out only in case communicating with the device
> failed.
Well, I can't but agree ... it's unnecessary crud indeed.
>
> >> Maybe these platforms should have been fixed prior to applying the patch
> >> adding regulator goo into ads7846 driver then. What's the way to go now
> >> then ?
> >
> > Fix the platforms and use the dummy regulators to keep them going until
> > that happens. It's trivial to do the hookup in the platforms.
>
> You want each platform, that does not have a special regulated power supply
> for the ads7846, to define a dummy regulator just to cope with that
> artificial dependency of the device driver?
You can enable some option in the regulator stuff that automagically shoves in a
dummy regulator, but it's still additional crud.
> I think it is a waste and big code duplication in each platform
> that does not have that special regulator.
Indeed
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
To: Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, vapier@gentoo.org,
khilman@deeprootsystems.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, eric.y.miao@gmail.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Input: Make ADS7846 independent on regulator
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 10:21:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201010051021.30496.marek.vasut@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CAACA63.6090202@compulab.co.il>
Dne Út 5. října 2010 08:49:07 Igor Grinberg napsal(a):
> On 09/09/10 12:41, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 10:27:17AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> Dne Út 7. září 2010 14:53:35 Mark Brown napsal(a):
> >>> From a regulator API usage point of view a separate implementation of
> >>> the same thing was nacked - there are regulator API facilties for
> >>> hiding missing regulators from drivers when needed to get systems
> >>> going, unless the device genuinely can cope without supplies it should
> >>> be relying on those.
>
> I actually, don't see why ads7846 is strictly relying on the regulator
> and I don't understand, why ads7846 driver has to bail out if the regulator
> is not found? Why shouldn't the driver try to continue?
> I think it should bail out only in case communicating with the device
> failed.
Well, I can't but agree ... it's unnecessary crud indeed.
>
> >> Maybe these platforms should have been fixed prior to applying the patch
> >> adding regulator goo into ads7846 driver then. What's the way to go now
> >> then ?
> >
> > Fix the platforms and use the dummy regulators to keep them going until
> > that happens. It's trivial to do the hookup in the platforms.
>
> You want each platform, that does not have a special regulated power supply
> for the ads7846, to define a dummy regulator just to cope with that
> artificial dependency of the device driver?
You can enable some option in the regulator stuff that automagically shoves in a
dummy regulator, but it's still additional crud.
> I think it is a waste and big code duplication in each platform
> that does not have that special regulator.
Indeed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-05 8:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-31 7:09 [PATCH v2] Input: Make ADS7846 independent on regulator Marek Vasut
2010-07-31 7:09 ` Marek Vasut
2010-09-07 12:23 ` Igor Grinberg
2010-09-07 12:23 ` Igor Grinberg
2010-09-07 12:53 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-07 12:53 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-09 8:27 ` Marek Vasut
2010-09-09 8:27 ` Marek Vasut
2010-09-09 8:27 ` Marek Vasut
2010-09-09 9:41 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-09 9:41 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-09 9:41 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-01 0:20 ` Marek Vasut
2010-10-01 0:20 ` Marek Vasut
2010-10-01 0:20 ` Marek Vasut
2010-10-05 6:49 ` Igor Grinberg
2010-10-05 6:49 ` Igor Grinberg
2010-10-05 6:49 ` Igor Grinberg
2010-10-05 8:21 ` Marek Vasut [this message]
2010-10-05 8:21 ` Marek Vasut
2010-10-05 8:21 ` Marek Vasut
2010-10-05 16:16 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-05 16:16 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-05 16:16 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-05 16:40 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-05 16:40 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-05 18:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-05 18:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-05 18:59 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-05 18:59 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-05 19:35 ` Alan Cox
2010-10-05 19:35 ` Alan Cox
2010-10-05 20:42 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-05 20:42 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-05 22:09 ` Linus Walleij
2010-10-05 22:09 ` Linus Walleij
2010-10-05 22:52 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-05 22:52 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-06 8:01 ` Linus Walleij
2010-10-06 8:01 ` Linus Walleij
2010-10-06 8:01 ` Linus Walleij
2010-10-06 15:14 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-06 15:14 ` Mark Brown
2010-10-06 15:14 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201010051021.30496.marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--to=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.y.miao@gmail.com \
--cc=grinberg@compulab.co.il \
--cc=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=vapier@gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.