From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grygorii Strashko Subject: Re: [RFC v1] regulator: core: introduce regulator chain locking scheme Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 19:29:35 +0300 Message-ID: <51701F6F.7070206@ti.com> References: <1366031015-17073-1-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <1366031015-17073-2-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <20130415155040.GD15837@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <516C2905.8000200@ti.com> <20130415164018.GA14064@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130415164018.GA14064@sirena.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Nishanth Menon , Tero Kristo , Mike Turquette , Andrii Tseglytskyi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , linux-omap , linux-arm List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On 04/15/2013 07:40 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 07:21:25PM +0300, Andrii Tseglytskyi wrote: >> On 04/15/2013 06:50 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >>>> In addition, such locking scheme allows to have access to the supplier >>>> regulator API from inside child's (consumer) regulator API. >>> I've still not seen any use case articulated for doing this... >> Use case is introduced in ABB series: > Sorry, I meant any sensible use case. Hi Mark, Thanks for you comments. I'll split it to 3 patches: - abstract locking out into helper functions; - introduce regulator chain locking scheme - allow reentrant calls into the regulator framework (with hope that is has future, may be can enable/disable it through constraints) I understand that Regulator FW is common and wide used and we should very careful here. Regards, - grygorii