From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maurus Cuelenaere Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sdhci-s3c: add regulator support Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:06:22 +0200 Message-ID: <4C50638E.7010101@gmail.com> References: <1280326797-15792-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <1280326797-15792-5-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <4C504326.30708@gmail.com> (sfid-20100728_154813_432417_3ADF200E) <3482ADFC-0FFB-47AE-B809-C88AC8B92C7F@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3482ADFC-0FFB-47AE-B809-C88AC8B92C7F@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Marek Szyprowski , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "kyungmin.park@samsung.com" , "kgene.kim@samsung.com" , "ben-linux@fluff.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Op 28-07-10 17:41, Mark Brown schreef: > On 28 Jul 2010, at 07:48, Maurus Cuelenaere wrote: >>> + struct sdhci_s3c *sc = sdhci_priv(host); >>> + >>> + if (sc->vmmc) { >>> + int ret = regulator_disable(sc->vmmc); >>> + if (ret) >>> + return ret; >>> + mdelay(2); >> Shouldn't these delays be handled in the regulator framework itself? > A 2ms delay on power down seems suspicious for a regulator. I'm not sure why this is required but if it is I suspect it's due to a large cap on the regulator output and light load rather than something that's always true for whatever regulator is providing the supply. I wasn't suggesting to do the delay in the framework *itself*, rather in the regulator driver and/or the board platform code which needs this delay. -- Maurus Cuelenaere