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 21:13:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5476266E.9040901@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141126175304.GM7712-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org>

Hi, MarkOn 26.11.2014 19:53, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 07:27:06PM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> On 25.11.2014 14:17, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>> b) "regulator-boot-on" does not mean that the regulator is controlled by
>> bootloader or firmware exclusively.
> 
> That's correct...
> 
>>>>> 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.
> 
> No, not at all.  It's referring to the state when Linux starts.
> 

thank you for clarification, to grasp the underlying policy let me ask
for some more information.

If I want to enable a fixed regulator (not controlled by
bootloader/firmware) by Linux on boot or when fixed.ko module is bound,
shall I specify the same "regulator-boot-on" property? At least this is
the practical way to enable a fixed and/or gpio regulator right now, but
is it correct?

Or should the regulator always be enabled externally (assuming
"regulator-always-on" is omitted) after registration independently on
"regulator-boot-on" property?

--
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 21:13:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5476266E.9040901@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141126175304.GM7712@sirena.org.uk>

Hi, MarkOn 26.11.2014 19:53, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 07:27:06PM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> On 25.11.2014 14:17, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>> b) "regulator-boot-on" does not mean that the regulator is controlled by
>> bootloader or firmware exclusively.
> 
> That's correct...
> 
>>>>> 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.
> 
> No, not at all.  It's referring to the state when Linux starts.
> 

thank you for clarification, to grasp the underlying policy let me ask
for some more information.

If I want to enable a fixed regulator (not controlled by
bootloader/firmware) by Linux on boot or when fixed.ko module is bound,
shall I specify the same "regulator-boot-on" property? At least this is
the practical way to enable a fixed and/or gpio regulator right now, but
is it correct?

Or should the regulator always be enabled externally (assuming
"regulator-always-on" is omitted) after registration independently on
"regulator-boot-on" property?

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-11-26 19:13 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
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 [this message]
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=5476266E.9040901@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.