From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Provide dummy supply support
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 10:41:27 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111102104126.GA2678@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111102100355.GJ23421@pengutronix.de>
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 11:03:56AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:27:21PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > As I think I said earlier I'd use the fixed regulator for this, all
> > Sascha's actually doing here is adding a wrapper to simplify
> > registration of that.
> There's one difference between the fixed and the dummy regulator though:
> The fixed regulator has a voltage. The same dummy regulator instance can
No, the voltage is optional.
> be used for all devices which do not have a software controllable
> regulator. I think the same can be done with the fixed regulator aswell,
> but the bogus voltage showing up in the sysfs entry might be confusing
> to users.
I don't think that's a meaningful issue, any in any case it'd be better
practice to fill it in so devices can use the information if they want
to (which really shouldn't be hard
> Another approach to this topic would be to allow a board to explicitely
> bind to the existing dummy regulator, like the following (error path
> should of course be implemented before applying this)
If you know you've got a fixed voltage supply I don't understand why you
wouldn't want to set one up. There clearly is an actual supply in the
system...
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Provide dummy supply support
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 10:41:27 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111102104126.GA2678@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111102100355.GJ23421@pengutronix.de>
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 11:03:56AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:27:21PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > As I think I said earlier I'd use the fixed regulator for this, all
> > Sascha's actually doing here is adding a wrapper to simplify
> > registration of that.
> There's one difference between the fixed and the dummy regulator though:
> The fixed regulator has a voltage. The same dummy regulator instance can
No, the voltage is optional.
> be used for all devices which do not have a software controllable
> regulator. I think the same can be done with the fixed regulator aswell,
> but the bogus voltage showing up in the sysfs entry might be confusing
> to users.
I don't think that's a meaningful issue, any in any case it'd be better
practice to fill it in so devices can use the information if they want
to (which really shouldn't be hard
> Another approach to this topic would be to allow a board to explicitely
> bind to the existing dummy regulator, like the following (error path
> should of course be implemented before applying this)
If you know you've got a fixed voltage supply I don't understand why you
wouldn't want to set one up. There clearly is an actual supply in the
system...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-02 10:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-28 20:26 [PATCH] regulator: provide dummy supply support Sascha Hauer
2011-10-28 20:26 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-10-28 20:26 ` [PATCH] regulator: Provide " Sascha Hauer
2011-10-28 20:26 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-10-28 21:59 ` Mark Brown
2011-10-28 21:59 ` Mark Brown
2011-10-28 22:47 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-10-28 22:47 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-10-28 23:16 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-10-28 23:16 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-10-29 17:42 ` Mark Brown
2011-10-29 17:42 ` Mark Brown
2011-11-01 17:50 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-11-01 17:50 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-11-01 18:27 ` Mark Brown
2011-11-01 18:27 ` Mark Brown
2011-11-02 10:03 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-11-02 10:03 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-11-02 10:41 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2011-11-02 10:41 ` Mark Brown
2011-11-02 14:29 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-11-02 14:29 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-10-28 21:57 ` [PATCH] regulator: provide " Mark Brown
2011-10-28 21:57 ` Mark Brown
2011-10-28 23:22 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-10-28 23:22 ` Mike Frysinger
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=20111102104126.GA2678@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@ti.com \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
--cc=uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org \
--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.