From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Charles Keepax Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4 v2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Do not control clocking from regulator Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 16:53:37 +0100 Message-ID: <20140623155337.GD23517@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1403275273-22713-5-git-send-email-ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20140621205349.GD24291@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B7752655A6 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 17:53:38 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140621205349.GD24291@sirena.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Mark Brown Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, sameo@linux.intel.com List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 09:53:49PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 03:41:13PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > > From: Richard Fitzgerald > > > > Using the driver for the internal regulator to also control > > the clock frequency of blocks inside the codec is an > > unexpected side-effect for a regulator, and also means that > > the core clocks won't be changed as expected if an external > > regulator is used to power the codec. > > > > The clocking control is now handled by the core arizona MFD > > driver so can be removed from the LDO1 driver. > > I would expect this to be squashed into the first patch since otherwise > there's a bisection issue with both drivers trying to maintain the same > thing at the same time. Whilst there are two things controlling it for a couple of patches they both set the same value one after another, so it should be safe. If it goes into the first patch nothing is controlling the DVFS for a few patches so that actually creates a bisection issue. It could be squashed into the second last patch but this way feels cleaner? Thanks, Charles