All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul Louvel" <paul.louvel@bootlin.com>
To: "Mark Brown" <broonie@kernel.org>,
	"Paul Louvel" <paul.louvel@bootlin.com>
Cc: "Conor Dooley" <conor@kernel.org>,
	"Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	"Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	"Herve Codina" <herve.codina@bootlin.com>,
	"Miquel Raynal" <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: dt-bindings: Add regulator-boot-force-off property
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 14:39:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DMBDGGZBYN60.37URQHQR2TS4C@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <atn_-NKv45AsROu3@sirena.co.uk>

Hi Mark,

On Thu Oct 22, 2026 at 2:22 PM CEST, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 07:11:51PM +0200, Paul Louvel wrote:
>> On Wed Oct 21, 2026 at 7:01 PM CEST, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 12:27:42PM +0200, Paul Louvel wrote:
>
>> >> +  regulator-boot-force-off:
>> >> +    description: a regulator may be enabled by default when the system powers up.
>> >> +      A consumer may query the regulator's state during boot and disable it if
>> >> +      it is already enabled, potentially resulting in an unbalanced disable
>> >> +      operation. This property ensures that the regulator is disabled at boot,
>> >> +      regardless of its previous state.
>
>> > To be honest, I'm not sure how the commentary about querying the state
>> > or being unbalanced is relevant to the description - that sounds like
>> > something specific to the linux regulator framework?
>
> I'm fairly sure this is about masking some driver bug, a driver should
> never be disabling something it didn't enable.
>
>> Yes it is. Maybe I miss something, does this binding is used outside linux ?
>
> Pretty sure u-boot uses it.
>
>> > In fact, I'm not sure why this is needed at all? Can't you just change
>> > the software so that it is okay to disable a regulator that has an
>> > explicit enable count of zero?
>
>> Do you mean by calling regulator_force_disable() instead ? I thinked about that
>> but I don't think this is ideal.
>
> No, you should only be using that API for recovering from catastrophic
> hardware errors where you're cutting power to do something like
> preventing physical damange to the system and serious disruption to
> other users is an acceptable cost.

Then I think a straightforward solution without any core change would be to call
regulator_enable() and immediately follow it with regulator_disable() in the
consumer driver's probe function to ensure that the regulator is in a known
disabled state.

I have considered this solution, but it doesn't feel quite right either, but
neither does this patch.

Thanks,
-- 
Paul Louvel, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com


  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-22 12:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-21 10:27 [PATCH 0/5] Add TI LM51772 buck-boost voltage regulator Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 10:27 ` [PATCH 1/5] regulator: dt-bindings: Add regulator-boot-force-off property Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 17:01   ` Conor Dooley
2026-10-21 17:11     ` Paul Louvel
2026-10-22  7:08       ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-10-22 12:22       ` Mark Brown
2026-10-22 12:39         ` Paul Louvel [this message]
2026-10-21 10:27 ` [PATCH 2/5] regulator: dt-bindings: Add TI LM51772 support Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 10:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-21 10:27 ` [PATCH 3/5] regulator: core: Add mechanism to force disable a regulator at boot Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 10:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-21 15:17     ` Paul Louvel
2026-10-22 13:48   ` Mark Brown
2026-10-21 10:27 ` [PATCH 4/5] regulator: Support regulators where the voltage selector spans two registers Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 10:45   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-21 15:10     ` Paul Louvel
2026-10-22 17:21   ` Mark Brown
2026-10-23 10:02     ` Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 10:27 ` [PATCH 5/5] regulator: Add TI LM51772 support Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 10:56   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-21 15:14     ` Paul Louvel
2026-10-21 15:10   ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-10-22 17:34   ` Mark Brown
2026-10-23  7:24     ` Paul Louvel
2026-10-24 19:28   ` kernel test robot
2026-10-22 13:42 ` [PATCH 0/5] Add TI LM51772 buck-boost voltage regulator Mark Brown
2026-10-23 10:31   ` Paul Louvel

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=DMBDGGZBYN60.37URQHQR2TS4C@bootlin.com \
    --to=paul.louvel@bootlin.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=conor@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=herve.codina@bootlin.com \
    --cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
    /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.