From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nishanth Menon Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] OPP: Redefine bindings to overcome shortcomings Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 11:34:13 -0500 Message-ID: <55537D05.4080009@ti.com> References: <554FFFA3.1060801@ti.com> <20150512051633.GB32300@linux> <555224A2.7000308@ti.com> <20150513050559.GE28858@linux> <55536719.5050208@ti.com> <20150513151652.GX2761@sirena.org.uk> <5553784F.7040905@ti.com> <20150513162127.GA2761@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150513162127.GA2761@sirena.org.uk> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Viresh Kumar , Rafael Wysocki , rob.herring@linaro.org, arnd.bergmann@linaro.org, mike.turquette@linaro.org, sboyd@codeaurora.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, olof@lixom.net, Sudeep.Holla@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, viswanath.puttagunta@linaro.org, l.stach@pengutronix.de, thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ta.omasab@gmail.com, kesavan.abhilash@gmail.com, khilman@linaro.org, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 05/13/2015 11:21 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:14:07AM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote: > >> To illustrate: What does it mean for a driver using regulator API? >> Attempt X <-> (X+Y), if that fails (example PMIC SMPS max < X), try >> (X-Y)<->(X)? If yes, then we do expect (X-Y)<->(X+Y) should be stable >> for all operating conditions for the device, correct? If this is is >> not stable at (X-Y), then we have a wrong specification for the device >> for claiming X +/- Y is a valid range for the device. > > We have an explicit regulator API call for setting by tolerance which > tries to get as close as possible to the target voltage (currently the > implementation is very cheap and nasty but ideally it'll get improved). > Thanks - I think the original implementation was triggered by the old "voltage-tolerance" mess, so wont be too surprised. With respect to the property itself, I still am not completely convinced that having typ actually helps. but having it does not hurt either, since min could be == typ in SoC description if desired. So, since I dont strongly feel either way here to reject things completely, and supposedly, it does help some other SoC vendors(which I am not convinced how), will leave the discussion alone for the moment. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon