From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@nokia.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: kalle.jokiniemi@nokia.com, lrg@slimlogic.co.uk,
mchehab@infradead.org, svarbatov@mm-sol.com, saaguirre@ti.com,
grosikopulos@mm-sol.com, vimarsh.zutshi@nokia.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Regulator state after regulator_get
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 13:27:46 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DB94122.9010203@nokia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110428102009.GB14494@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 09:44:10AM +0000, kalle.jokiniemi@nokia.com wrote:
>
>> > Another alternative to the first option you proposed could be to add a
>> > flags field to regulator_consumer_supply, and use a flag to recognise
>> > regulators which need to be disabled during initialisation. The flag
>> > could be set by using a new macro e.g. REGULATOR_SUPPLY_NASTY() when
>> > defining the regulator.
>
>> This sounds like a good option actually. Liam, Mark, any opinions?
>
> I'm not sure what "supply_nasty" would mean? This also doesn't seem
> like something that we can set up per supply - it's going to affect the
> whole regulator state, it's not something that only affects a single
> supply.
supply_nasty() would be used to define a regulator which is enabled by
the boot loader when it shouldn't be, which is the actual problem.
We have a regulator which is enabled by the boot loader. However, this
regulator shouldn't be on at boot since it's not needed by any devices
--- the drivers for those devices will use proper regulator framework
calls to use the regulator when it's needed. There's no chance to have
the boot loader fixed, as stated by Kalle.
How should this regulator be turned off in the boot by the kernel?
Regards,
--
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@maxwell.research.nokia.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-28 10:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-28 9:01 [RFC] Regulator state after regulator_get kalle.jokiniemi
2011-04-28 9:34 ` Sakari Ailus
2011-04-28 9:44 ` kalle.jokiniemi
2011-04-28 10:20 ` Mark Brown
2011-04-28 10:27 ` Sakari Ailus [this message]
2011-04-28 10:40 ` Mark Brown
2011-04-28 11:07 ` Sakari Ailus
2011-04-28 10:06 ` Mark Brown
2011-04-28 11:08 ` kalle.jokiniemi
2011-04-28 11:14 ` Mark Brown
2011-04-28 11:58 ` kalle.jokiniemi
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=4DB94122.9010203@nokia.com \
--to=sakari.ailus@nokia.com \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=grosikopulos@mm-sol.com \
--cc=kalle.jokiniemi@nokia.com \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@slimlogic.co.uk \
--cc=mchehab@infradead.org \
--cc=saaguirre@ti.com \
--cc=svarbatov@mm-sol.com \
--cc=vimarsh.zutshi@nokia.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox