From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
To: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] omapfb: Fix regulator API abuse in dss.c and hdmi4.c
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:11:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56FD5A2C.7090608@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1459355376-28507-1-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2195 bytes --]
On 31/03/16 19:49, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:30:11AM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>
>> This code did fix an issue, see 02b7a32083b9930543663720758de249b4f6a2a3.
>
> That change isn't sensible, especially the _can_change_voltage() like I
> said in the commit log.
I may remember wrong, but I think regulator_set_voltage() failed if
regulator_can_change_voltage() returned false. So I ended up having the
'if' there. But I may remember wrong, or maybe it's been changed since.
>> Now, even at the time when I wrote that fix, it did feel a bit odd to
>> me. I have to say I don't remember the discussion that led to the patch,
>> perhaps it was something along "yes, the driver should not need to do
>> that, but for the time being do it".
>
> That wasn't a discusion I was involved in, a quick google suggests it
> might've been off-list.
That's possible. With quick googling, this may have longer history than
the patch I sent.
>> So where are these "machine constraints" defined?
>
> They're the DT. Your machine constraints just seem broken and need to
> be fixed, most likely whoever wrote the constraints for the platform
> completely failed to understand the purpose of constraints and filled in
> the maximum range of voltages that the regulator in use on the board can
> support.
Ok.
Tero, Tony, with a quick look, for example omap5-board-common.dtsi
defines ldo4_reg having range from 1.5 to 1.8. That should be changed to
1.8 only, right? ldo1_reg has a range too, I'm not familiar with that
LDO's use, but it's for camera so my guess is that it should be 1.8 too.
I can have a more thorough look tomorrow, and do a test run on omap5
uevm (with Mark's patch).
I wonder why we have the same code in hdmi4. Again with a quick look,
omap4 boards seem to use vdac for hdmi, and vdac doesn't have any
constraints in twl6030.dtsi, so I presume it's a fixed-voltage.
Anyway, I'm happy to apply this patch (and we need similar for hdmi5,
and also for omapdrm), we just need to do any necessary fixes to the
.dts first.
Although strictly speaking, I guess that's breaking backward
compatibility...
Tomi
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-31 17:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-30 16:29 [PATCH] omapfb: Fix regulator API abuse in dss.c and hdmi4.c Mark Brown
2016-03-31 6:30 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2016-03-31 16:49 ` Mark Brown
2016-03-31 17:11 ` Tomi Valkeinen [this message]
2016-03-31 17:39 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-26 16:22 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-26 16:37 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2016-04-26 16:42 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-26 16:45 ` Tomi Valkeinen
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=56FD5A2C.7090608@ti.com \
--to=tomi.valkeinen@ti.com \
--cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.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.