From: mpa@pengutronix.de (Markus Pargmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] regulator: core bugfix: Use normal enable for always_on regulators
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:40:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140218214007.GE10590@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140218001420.GF2669@sirena.org.uk>
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 09:14:20AM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 08:00:56PM +0100, Markus Pargmann wrote:
>
> Please use more standard subject lines, don't do things like "core
> bugfix", just write a normal changelog.
Okay, will fix.
>
> > +static int _regulator_do_enable_no_delay(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (rdev->ena_pin) {
> > + ret = regulator_ena_gpio_ctrl(rdev, true);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > + rdev->ena_gpio_state = 1;
> > + } else if (rdev->desc->ops->enable) {
> > + ret = rdev->desc->ops->enable(rdev);
> > + } else {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> I don't understand this. Why is this called _no_delay() and why don't
> we want to delay when applying constraints? We don't want to ever be in
> a position where we think a supply is enabled but it has in fact not
> finished ramping, and of course enable() may in fact be blocking anyway.
I tried not to modify the current behaviour of the core driver for
non-gpio regulators. Before this patch only ops->enable() was called
which also didn't have a delay. So I seperated the non-delay enable
function to have the same behaviour for normal regulators.
Also the constraints are applied when registering a new regulator. For
"boot-on" we should not delay because this regulator is already on by
definition. But I am not sure what to do with always-on regulators?
Thanks,
Markus
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20140218/a448bd84/attachment.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-18 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-16 19:00 [PATCH] regulator: core bugfix: Use normal enable for always_on regulators Markus Pargmann
2014-02-18 0:14 ` Mark Brown
2014-02-18 21:40 ` Markus Pargmann [this message]
2014-02-19 1:46 ` 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=20140218214007.GE10590@pengutronix.de \
--to=mpa@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).