From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755958Ab2LNCqm (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:46:42 -0500 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:58249 "EHLO opensource.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753410Ab2LNCql (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:46:41 -0500 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:46:28 +0900 From: Mark Brown To: Lee Jones Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, linus.walleij@stericsson.com, ulf.hansson@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/12] regulator: gpio-regulator: Only read GPIO [dis|en]able pin if not always-on Message-ID: <20121214024626.GA4478@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1355129761-8088-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1355129761-8088-3-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <20121210141000.GC6103@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20121213114818.GH27617@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121213114818.GH27617@gmail.com> X-Cookie: Big book, big bore. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:48:18AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 08:55:51AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > If a regulator is specified as always-on, then it can't have an > > > enable/disable pin, as it can't be turned off. > > Sometimes always on gets set for regulators which do have a physical > > control wired up - the control might exist for use in suspend mode for > > example. Is the ability to specify an enable pin causing a practical > > problem for systems? If it is we should fix that. > My logic is that there is no point in requesting a pin which can > disable a regulator that can't be disabled. Then we can follow > on from that logic and say that if a regulator is _not_ always on > this we _require_ a way to disable it, thus we insist on an enable > GPIO pin. > With me? No. Making the enable pin optional for always on regulators is fine, forbidding it is not - that won't work for things like the suspend case I mentioned.