From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Dietrich Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] ARM: dt: tegra: paz00: add regulators Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 20:50:57 +0200 Message-ID: <21985997.TUGv5fZBXQ@ax5200p> References: <1340757060-27232-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20120627113100.GF308@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120627113100.GF308-yzvPICuk2AATkU/dhu1WVueM+bqZidxxQQ4Iyu8u01E@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Stephen Warren , Olof Johansson , Colin Cross , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Stephen Warren List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 27 June 2012 12:31:01 Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:31:00PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > > sm1: HW defaults and schematic match at 1.0v. marvin24's kernel had a max > > of 1.125v, but this wasn't applied since apply_uV wasn't set. > > apply_uV is only valid if a single voltage is specified. yes, that's why there is a ".apply_uV = (_minmv == _maxmv)" in the regulator macro. > If a voltage > range were specified and it were acted on we'd take the lowest (not > highest) voltage allowed. Sorry, I don't get it. In this case, the board wouldn't boot at all because nearly all supplies would be undervoltaged. I just checked and all voltages are actually set to the *highest* (max) value. Maybe they aren't changed at all? Marc