From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Use parent voltage from the supply when bypassed
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:27:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56FD33EE.6030109@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1459359124-22436-1-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org>
On 30/03/16 18:32, Mark Brown wrote:
> When a regulator is in bypass mode it is functioning as a switch
> returning the voltage set in the regulator will not give the voltage
> being output by the regulator as it's just passing through its supply.
> This means that when we are getting the voltage from a regulator we
> should check to see if it is in bypass mode and if it is we should
> report the voltage from the supply rather than that which is set on the
> regulator.
>
> Reported-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> ---
>
> Completely untested.
>
> drivers/regulator/core.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index 74e8a7a3b3e8..03042e450399 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -3118,6 +3118,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(regulator_sync_voltage);
> static int _regulator_get_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> {
> int sel, ret;
> + bool bypassed;
> +
> + if (rdev->desc->ops->get_bypass) {
> + ret = rdev->desc->ops->get_bypass(rdev, &bypassed);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + if (bypassed) {
> + if (rdev->supply) {
> + ret = _regulator_get_voltage(rdev->supply->rdev);
Should this be a return here?
> + } else {
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + }
> + }
>
> if (rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage_sel) {
> sel = rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage_sel(rdev);
>
I gave this a quick test on tegra124 having populated the
get/set_bypass() operators for the as3722. In this case, there is still
a problem because _regulator_get_voltage() is called during regulator
registration when set_machine_constraints() is called, which is before
we have called regulator_register_resolve_supply(). Therefore, it seems
to me that we still need to resolve the supply before we call
set_machine_constraints().
Jon
next parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-31 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1459359124-22436-1-git-send-email-broonie@kernel.org>
2016-03-31 14:27 ` Jon Hunter [this message]
[not found] ` <56FD33EE.6030109-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-31 17:55 ` [PATCH] regulator: core: Use parent voltage from the supply when bypassed Mark Brown
2016-04-01 16:58 ` Thierry Reding
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56FD33EE.6030109@nvidia.com \
--to=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox