All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy-nmGgyN9QBj3QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	"devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
	<devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: Question about fixed regulator DT properties
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:27:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54760D6A.9080306@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141125121749.GV7712-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org>

Hello Mark,

On 25.11.2014 14:17, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 04:38:01PM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> Hello Mark,
>>
>> On 18.11.2014 17:00, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> 
> Your mail is really quite long and all in quotes which makes it hard to
> follow, brevity is really helpful to readers.

my sole purpose was to describe the problems I encounter in details,
sorry for excessive verbosity.

Just to summarize my findings:
a) "enable-active-high" property has no effect on GPIO output,
b) "regulator-boot-on" does not mean that the regulator is controlled by
bootloader or firmware exclusively.

>>> | regulator-boot-on | enable-active-high | GPIO polarity | GPIO output |
>>> +-------------------+--------------------+---------------+-------------+
>>> |        no         |         yes        |  active high  |    low      |
>>> |        no         |          no        |  active low   |   high      |
> 
>>> I'd rather think that both resulting GPIO outputs are incorrect or
>>> better to say do not correspond to my perception of "regulator-boot-on"
>>> and "enable-active-high" DTS properties described in the documentation,
>>> however above "enable-active-high" and actual GPIO polarity are the same
>>> (when they are not, it is another open topic for discussion).
> 
> What you're saying seems sensible.

Good, I read it as a confirmation that the problem exists.

>>> Should documentation be updated to reflect "regulator-boot-on" role that
>>> a regulator is re-enabled by the kernel?
> 
> I'm confused about this.  That's the sole purpose of the flag and as far
> as I can tell it's what the documentation says.

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt says:

  - regulator-boot-on: bootloader/firmware enabled regulator

I would suggest to add Linux kernel to that list of regulator
controllers, if it is the intention. In its current state the
documentation makes an impression that "regulator-boot-on" property
instructs the kernel to ignore regulator setup, since it is already
controlled by bootloader or firmware.

>>> Should "enable-active-high" be replaced by getting GPIO flags directly?
> 
> Probably makes sense, it predates those flags by quite some time.
> 

If you have no objection I'll take a look how to fix it by removing
"enable-active-high" flag completely from the driver's logic,
fortunately the flag has no tangible effect at the moment as it is shown
by my analysis.

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about fixed regulator DT properties
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:27:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54760D6A.9080306@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141125121749.GV7712@sirena.org.uk>

Hello Mark,

On 25.11.2014 14:17, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 04:38:01PM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> Hello Mark,
>>
>> On 18.11.2014 17:00, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> 
> Your mail is really quite long and all in quotes which makes it hard to
> follow, brevity is really helpful to readers.

my sole purpose was to describe the problems I encounter in details,
sorry for excessive verbosity.

Just to summarize my findings:
a) "enable-active-high" property has no effect on GPIO output,
b) "regulator-boot-on" does not mean that the regulator is controlled by
bootloader or firmware exclusively.

>>> | regulator-boot-on | enable-active-high | GPIO polarity | GPIO output |
>>> +-------------------+--------------------+---------------+-------------+
>>> |        no         |         yes        |  active high  |    low      |
>>> |        no         |          no        |  active low   |   high      |
> 
>>> I'd rather think that both resulting GPIO outputs are incorrect or
>>> better to say do not correspond to my perception of "regulator-boot-on"
>>> and "enable-active-high" DTS properties described in the documentation,
>>> however above "enable-active-high" and actual GPIO polarity are the same
>>> (when they are not, it is another open topic for discussion).
> 
> What you're saying seems sensible.

Good, I read it as a confirmation that the problem exists.

>>> Should documentation be updated to reflect "regulator-boot-on" role that
>>> a regulator is re-enabled by the kernel?
> 
> I'm confused about this.  That's the sole purpose of the flag and as far
> as I can tell it's what the documentation says.

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt says:

  - regulator-boot-on: bootloader/firmware enabled regulator

I would suggest to add Linux kernel to that list of regulator
controllers, if it is the intention. In its current state the
documentation makes an impression that "regulator-boot-on" property
instructs the kernel to ignore regulator setup, since it is already
controlled by bootloader or firmware.

>>> Should "enable-active-high" be replaced by getting GPIO flags directly?
> 
> Probably makes sense, it predates those flags by quite some time.
> 

If you have no objection I'll take a look how to fix it by removing
"enable-active-high" flag completely from the driver's logic,
fortunately the flag has no tangible effect at the moment as it is shown
by my analysis.

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-11-26 17:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-11-18 15:00 Question about Vladimir Zapolskiy
2014-11-18 15:00 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2014-11-19 14:38 ` Question about fixed regulator DT properties Vladimir Zapolskiy
2014-11-19 14:38   ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
     [not found]   ` <546CAB49.8030103-nmGgyN9QBj3QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2014-11-25 12:17     ` Mark Brown
2014-11-25 12:17       ` Mark Brown
     [not found]       ` <20141125121749.GV7712-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org>
2014-11-26 17:27         ` Vladimir Zapolskiy [this message]
2014-11-26 17:27           ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2014-11-26 17:53           ` Mark Brown
     [not found]             ` <20141126175304.GM7712-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org>
2014-11-26 19:13               ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2014-11-26 19:13                 ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
     [not found]                 ` <5476266E.9040901-nmGgyN9QBj3QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2014-11-26 19:20                   ` Mark Brown
2014-11-26 19:20                     ` Mark Brown
     [not found]                     ` <20141126192021.GU7712-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org>
2014-11-26 19:57                       ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2014-11-26 19:57                         ` Vladimir Zapolskiy
2014-11-26 20:36                         ` 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=54760D6A.9080306@mentor.com \
    --to=vladimir_zapolskiy-nmggyn9qbj3qt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.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.