From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Kemnade Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl: mark vdd1/2 as continuous on twl4030 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:32:25 +0200 Message-ID: <20190617183225.1210c91c@aktux> References: <20190615163314.28173-1-andreas@kemnade.info> <20190617103111.GM5316@sirena.org.uk> <20190617130357.41204ff7@kemnade.info> <20190617114048.GN5316@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190617114048.GN5316@sirena.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: tony@atomide.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org, nm@ti.com, vireshk@kernel.org, letux-kernel@openphoenux.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:40:48 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:03:57PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 06:33:14PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > > > Why is this a good fix and not defining the supported voltages? These > > > look like fairly standard linear range regulators. > > > I am fixing the definition of the two regulators in the patch. > > I am defining them as continuous. > > Voltage ranges are defined in > > arch/arm/boot/dts/twl4030.dtsi > > Only the continuous flag is missing. > > > Is there anything else do you want to be defined? > > These regulators are not continuous regulators as far as I can see, they > are normal linear range regulators and so should have their voltages > enumerable like any other linear range regulator. another thing which might be misleading: The patch belongs to the section after #define TWL4030_ADJUSTABLE_SMPS(label, offset, num, turnon_delay, remap_conf) that might be easily misread (because of too less context in the diff), or if line numbers change. It is *not* for #define TWL4030_ADJUSTABLE_LDO(label, offset, num, turnon_delay, remap_conf) Regards, Andreas