From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 17:07:44 +0100 Message-ID: <20180530160744.GS6920@sirena.org.uk> References: <20180523154057.GL4828@sirena.org.uk> <20180523155617.GN4828@sirena.org.uk> <20180530093701.GD6920@sirena.org.uk> <20180530150241.GO6920@sirena.org.uk> <20180530154849.GQ6920@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1IOPqZ3f1xe/JZlz" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Doug Anderson Cc: David Collins , Liam Girdwood , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Rajendra Nayak , Stephen Boyd List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org --1IOPqZ3f1xe/JZlz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Without the core doing something the regulator isn't going to get told > > that anything updated voltages anyway... > I was just suggesting that when the core tells the regulator driver to > disable itself that the regulator driver tell RPMh to not only disable > itself but also (temporarily) vote for a lower voltage. When the core > tells the regulator to re-enable itself then the regulator driver > restores the original voltage vote (or applies any vote that might > have been attempted while the regulator was disabled). That wouldn't > require any regulator core changes. It needs something to tell it what the new voltage to set is. --1IOPqZ3f1xe/JZlz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAlsOzE8ACgkQJNaLcl1U h9AIrQf/TFGg2jyGgAkOVoUcnkOUimhz6KvGgF/8GhDJAtv0bHjLpgSK2G/qzDdU 4sdpX0aS6Sr6vpOn1x0mDtZr1aayVRX0pLiBGdPbccQPY9NhYQOFbiFFooKr9+ay i8nQg06gjTOcI3huoEXoeuVwSz1riTh7f22/EP2vJwTUytwN+A/Eom5+dQa+TPsX mPXNrdke8ZN/0unrfmbwKHbuEXLOCNPii4aDIq54SxORU5tX7b1MEbEl+jKJ8rAI ZnjDglqFEjehqFGVOpwI763pyxOvf+b37qHlqmTtYZqofJdWnuoBSVcktn0uR3/E Pu2cEtYtHn8IhwjPaNQKQTP/B+/Fqw== =U8bR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1IOPqZ3f1xe/JZlz-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@kernel.org (Mark Brown) Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 17:07:44 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings In-Reply-To: References: <20180523154057.GL4828@sirena.org.uk> <20180523155617.GN4828@sirena.org.uk> <20180530093701.GD6920@sirena.org.uk> <20180530150241.GO6920@sirena.org.uk> <20180530154849.GQ6920@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: <20180530160744.GS6920@sirena.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Without the core doing something the regulator isn't going to get told > > that anything updated voltages anyway... > I was just suggesting that when the core tells the regulator driver to > disable itself that the regulator driver tell RPMh to not only disable > itself but also (temporarily) vote for a lower voltage. When the core > tells the regulator to re-enable itself then the regulator driver > restores the original voltage vote (or applies any vote that might > have been attempted while the regulator was disabled). That wouldn't > require any regulator core changes. It needs something to tell it what the new voltage to set is. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: not available URL: