From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752983AbaHDOrp (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Aug 2014 10:47:45 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:45874 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752954AbaHDOrn (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Aug 2014 10:47:43 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 15:46:46 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Heiko =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= Cc: linus.walleij@linaro.org, addy.ke@rock-chips.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20140804144646.GR30458@sirena.org.uk> References: <3923586.SsVg941346@diego> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5N2+S1LJ+nNsdJJZ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3923586.SsVg941346@diego> X-Cookie: You look tired. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 92.40.249.223 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: io-domain voltages as regulators? X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --5N2+S1LJ+nNsdJJZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 12:18:40AM +0200, Heiko St=FCbner wrote: > As this sound like exactly the thing I'm trying to solve, is handling thi= s via=20 > a regulator the correct general way? My first thought is that it seems sensible if it's used as a regulated supply in a context where just a plain regulator might be used like MMC/SDIO type things. If it's only setting logic levels for I/O pins but isn't something that's being dynamically managed or really visible to software (it's just a board design thing) then it might not be worth it but if it might be controlled by changing an external regulator then using the same API seems like it might be sensible. --5N2+S1LJ+nNsdJJZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJT35zSAAoJELSic+t+oim9E18P/1W0TurxpNx2T3wDY+E9qhsN kldaRs9pjcM4XxLE2FPlU9DTJXWTu3a5WV8b5ivCkHZZIIW10GFu6DBXkSluoFHm /3F3nGPdMT+J6cv7cGoXdX5p6MrepwzzP/EdUBJNaOJIbv4cNkFbAtlyDmid4I0S FzyyCE7/e0cFX1d8NAukk28ArmZ+/ZJQ0Xb9SodoAWwl2Bs7T2Q2GSS4lku1uyoG KgzN1OutNr1JKn7SIGyLf//aVh2mwM8plZu3iqF5EPNTGk4GhhxRWqDXZuWF2+oc uPKcVz8aDXfEzY4mp785jgG1eS5PzXym1n+rrsSr/+m8gRM/YQQux4KWL4OeZNiD 2ZuoUg/SU1wHm65LSRl1l1WOtfqF0gHQZu9gOp9cQ2butSQid2hJ1vWeOGjPdUQS mp8lEbLUq7DV3Gq7cxLeuk0gQrfJdZRV9xbyHMtSLsKySTf5HT6Vkp1ak/aWH09D L9SmUN0cPYFvdOfAd93tbbj75O7mCTIV5oV+1gmSwxKNVHPyDYSVITzrKjzs/655 savMoJKFmTSmwHAU4n/rhU24D28iyd+hxErSa8lFd7pqFX1kQFJONwzcRnAFQVDc qg/w2hAGCfPxPryUhHwcnWkgEuoVXyGru1Xfr8dfT6Dgew3ChQVK3XDMEtEdJXn2 edI5w9djHvVYeS0crsXn =1OB5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5N2+S1LJ+nNsdJJZ--