From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751508Ab0HQVDS (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:03:18 -0400 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:57801 "EHLO opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751025Ab0HQVDN (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:03:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:03:12 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Bobby Crabtree Cc: lrg@slimlogic.co.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: regulator voltage aggregation Message-ID: <20100817210312.GD5755@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <4C6ACF92.7050506@codeaurora.org> <20100817181557.GA5755@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4C6AE40D.7090206@codeaurora.org> <20100817195008.GC5755@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4C6AF4B4.4060004@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C6AF4B4.4060004@codeaurora.org> X-Cookie: You should go home. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 01:44:36PM -0700, Bobby Crabtree wrote: > Only remaining question I have is if the aggregation of > multiple consumer constraints should be the default (and only) > behavior. Or should we introduce a new flag to the > regulator_constraints structure that tells the core to aggregate > consumer voltages constraints? I'd say make it the only behaviour - if there is only one consumer it decays into the same behaviour as we have currently, and since voltage changes need to be explicitly enabled by the machine constraints it should not affect any existing machines. One thing to take account of is an attempt to set a constraint which can't be accomodated by the other enabled devices, or enable a device which has constraints outside the currently allowed range.