[PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Adrian Hunter]

TWL4030 and TWL5030 support 3.0V on VAUX3.

Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
---



According to TI:
http://community.ti.com/forums/t/3777.aspx



 drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
index 8655443..1755026 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static const u16 VAUX2_VSEL_table[] = {
 };
 static const u16 VAUX3_VSEL_table[] = {
 	1500, 1800, 2500, 2800,
-	UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000),
+	3000, 3000, 3000, 3000,
 };
 static const u16 VAUX4_VSEL_table[] = {
 	700, 1000, 1200, UNSUP(1300),
-- 
1.5.6.3

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Liam Girdwood]

On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 15:01 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> TWL4030 and TWL5030 support 3.0V on VAUX3.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>

Applied.

Thanks

Liam

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[David Brownell]

On Friday 06 March 2009, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> TWL4030 and TWL5030 support 3.0V on VAUX3.

I double checked several technical reference manuals, and they
say otherwise.   The 3.0V settings in VAUX3_DEDICATED are very
consistently labeled as "TI cannot support these values", for
all current versions of chips with a VAUX3 supply:

  TWL4030 ES3.1
  TWL5030 ES1.1
  TPS65930 ES1.0 (more or less a cost-reduced TWL5030)
  TPS65950 ES1.0 (more or less TWL5030)

So, NAK on this.

Do you really need 3.0V out of that regulator?  If so,
then I'd rather see a patch exposing that CONFIG_*
setting to enable all the unsupported/out-of-range
values, rather than just selectively hacking those
tables to permit some (but not all) of them to be used
out-of-range.


> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
> ---
> 
> According to TI:
> http://community.ti.com/forums/t/3777.aspx

That looks to me like some random TI developer reading the
manual and ignoring the label on those settings:  Yes if you
set that value it'll probably work.  But no, if you rely on
that it's working out-of-spec, and is clearly marked as such.


 
> 
> 
>  drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
> index 8655443..1755026 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
> @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static const u16 VAUX2_VSEL_table[] = {
>  };
>  static const u16 VAUX3_VSEL_table[] = {
>  	1500, 1800, 2500, 2800,
> -	UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000),
> +	3000, 3000, 3000, 3000,
>  };
>  static const u16 VAUX4_VSEL_table[] = {
>  	700, 1000, 1200, UNSUP(1300),
> -- 
> 1.5.6.3
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Mark Brown]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 11:16:20AM -0800, David Brownell wrote:

> Do you really need 3.0V out of that regulator?  If so,
> then I'd rather see a patch exposing that CONFIG_*
> setting to enable all the unsupported/out-of-range
> values, rather than just selectively hacking those
> tables to permit some (but not all) of them to be used
> out-of-range.

Would it make sense to make this platform data so that if a given board
requires running the chip like this it can be enabled for those boards
but it's not something people might turn on because it seems useful?

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[David Brownell]

On Friday 06 March 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> Would it make sense to make this platform data so that if a given board
> requires running the chip like this it can be enabled for those boards
> but it's not something people might turn on because it seems useful?

Let's hear if it's actually needed, first.  :)

I coded those tables so that it would be easy to kick in the
support for out-of-spec operation if it's really needed.  But
so far we don't know that it's needed, and I'd rather it not
be too easy to run like that.

- Dave

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Liam Girdwood]

On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 14:48 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Friday 06 March 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Would it make sense to make this platform data so that if a given board
> > requires running the chip like this it can be enabled for those boards
> > but it's not something people might turn on because it seems useful?
> 
> Let's hear if it's actually needed, first.  :)
> 
> I coded those tables so that it would be easy to kick in the
> support for out-of-spec operation if it's really needed.  But
> so far we don't know that it's needed, and I'd rather it not
> be too easy to run like that.
> 

I've now reverted this patch. 

Liam

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Adrian Hunter]

Liam Girdwood wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 14:48 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
>> On Friday 06 March 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> Would it make sense to make this platform data so that if a given board
>>> requires running the chip like this it can be enabled for those boards
>>> but it's not something people might turn on because it seems useful?
>> Let's hear if it's actually needed, first.  :)
>>
>> I coded those tables so that it would be easy to kick in the
>> support for out-of-spec operation if it's really needed.  But
>> so far we don't know that it's needed, and I'd rather it not
>> be too easy to run like that.
>>
> 
> I've now reverted this patch. 

TI say we can use VAUX3 at 3V and expect no problems:

http://community.ti.com/forums/p/3777/14574.aspx

So how do we do it?

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Liam Girdwood]

On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 09:36 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> Liam Girdwood wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 14:48 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> >> On Friday 06 March 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
> >>> Would it make sense to make this platform data so that if a given board
> >>> requires running the chip like this it can be enabled for those boards
> >>> but it's not something people might turn on because it seems useful?
> >> Let's hear if it's actually needed, first.  :)
> >>
> >> I coded those tables so that it would be easy to kick in the
> >> support for out-of-spec operation if it's really needed.  But
> >> so far we don't know that it's needed, and I'd rather it not
> >> be too easy to run like that.
> >>
> > 
> > I've now reverted this patch. 
> 
> TI say we can use VAUX3 at 3V and expect no problems:
> 
> http://community.ti.com/forums/p/3777/14574.aspx
> 
> So how do we do it?

I'd prefer seeing the reply from Ghandar to David's last question before
accepting this patch again. It's still not 100% clear from TI, things
seem a little bit muddled as to whether 3V will be guaranteed to work on
*all* shipped devices.

Thanks

Liam

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Adrian Hunter]

Liam Girdwood wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 09:36 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>> Liam Girdwood wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 14:48 -0800, David Brownell wrote:
>>>> On Friday 06 March 2009, Mark Brown wrote:
>>>>> Would it make sense to make this platform data so that if a given board
>>>>> requires running the chip like this it can be enabled for those boards
>>>>> but it's not something people might turn on because it seems useful?
>>>> Let's hear if it's actually needed, first.  :)
>>>>
>>>> I coded those tables so that it would be easy to kick in the
>>>> support for out-of-spec operation if it's really needed.  But
>>>> so far we don't know that it's needed, and I'd rather it not
>>>> be too easy to run like that.
>>>>
>>> I've now reverted this patch. 
>> TI say we can use VAUX3 at 3V and expect no problems:
>>
>> http://community.ti.com/forums/p/3777/14574.aspx
>>
>> So how do we do it?
> 
> I'd prefer seeing the reply from Ghandar to David's last question before
> accepting this patch again. It's still not 100% clear from TI, things
> seem a little bit muddled as to whether 3V will be guaranteed to work on
> *all* shipped devices.

Ghandar has responded.  What would you like to do?

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[David Brownell]

On Wednesday 25 March 2009, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >> http://community.ti.com/forums/p/3777/14574.aspx
> >>
> >> So how do we do it?
> > 
> > I'd prefer seeing the reply from Ghandar to David's last question before
> > accepting this patch again. It's still not 100% clear from TI, things
> > seem a little bit muddled as to whether 3V will be guaranteed to work on
> > *all* shipped devices.
> 
> Ghandar has responded.  What would you like to do?

Update the patch to include a comment (by the table def)
that TI says they're revising the twl5030/tps659x0 specs
to support that 3.0V setting, then merge it.

(Umm, though I'd be sure to find out specifically which
selectors they're supporting that way, first...)

I don't think they'll be revising specs on chips they've
shipped already ... but this isn't likely to matter on
those older systems, anyway; example, the 3430 SDP uses
VAUX3, but at the always-supported 2.8V setting.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Adrian Hunter]

>From 51f946af56a5de9c25b2eb6e6a33660283f84195 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:51:30 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

TWL4030 and TWL5030 support 3.0V on VAUX3.

Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
---
 drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c |    5 ++++-
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
index f3ec98c..e2032fb 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c
@@ -193,6 +193,9 @@ static int twl4030reg_set_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev, unsigned mode)
  *
  * VSEL values documented as "TI cannot support these values" are flagged
  * in these tables as UNSUP() values; we normally won't assign them.
+ *
+ * VAUX3 at 3V is incorrectly listed in some TI manuals as unsupported.
+ * TI are revising the twl5030/tps659x0 specs to support that 3.0V setting.
  */
 #ifdef CONFIG_TWL4030_ALLOW_UNSUPPORTED
 #define UNSUP_MASK	0x0000
@@ -223,7 +226,7 @@ static const u16 VAUX2_VSEL_table[] = {
 };
 static const u16 VAUX3_VSEL_table[] = {
 	1500, 1800, 2500, 2800,
-	UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000), UNSUP(3000),
+	3000, 3000, 3000, 3000,
 };
 static const u16 VAUX4_VSEL_table[] = {
 	700, 1000, 1200, UNSUP(1300),
-- 
1.5.6.3

Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V

[Liam Girdwood]

On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 16:21 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >From 51f946af56a5de9c25b2eb6e6a33660283f84195 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
> Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:51:30 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] regulator: twl4030 VAUX3 supports 3.0V
> 
> TWL4030 and TWL5030 support 3.0V on VAUX3.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
> ---
>  drivers/regulator/twl4030-regulator.c |    5 ++++-
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

Applied.

Thanks

Liam