From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89326C31E5D for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 16:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6350A2084D for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 16:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kemnade.info header.i=@kemnade.info header.b="KAmzeS4j" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727557AbfFQQ1s (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:27:48 -0400 Received: from mail.andi.de1.cc ([85.214.239.24]:58722 "EHLO mail.andi.de1.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725863AbfFQQ1s (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:27:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kemnade.info; s=20180802; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=V1J5KcSxrmH6kMxoNhKSoFAdQCQGIWo+tRQvbszLDJM=; b=KAmzeS4j/v69f/vQoCyWhWlPgL mGRwjrgL+MK7xaGU9oj98xKnUYud42p/Yy2Y3GnpQfOtwckJZD+F2LP5uD5BYNXSlG8lW3IQ9KcWa BQty8OMnl+zEnFxexcXLU5ilJQPZRj6h2JpaUakEhNf8S9Ruo5gj03cgzelBhpMSD5EY=; Received: from p5dcc3c96.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.204.60.150] helo=aktux) by mail.andi.de1.cc with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hcuTw-0003bY-3i; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:27:44 +0200 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:27:43 +0200 From: Andreas Kemnade To: Mark Brown Cc: tony@atomide.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sboyd@kernel.org, nm@ti.com, vireshk@kernel.org, letux-kernel@openphoenux.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: twl: mark vdd1/2 as continuous on twl4030 Message-ID: <20190617182743.7f40f2ee@aktux> In-Reply-To: <20190617114048.GN5316@sirena.org.uk> References: <20190615163314.28173-1-andreas@kemnade.info> <20190617103111.GM5316@sirena.org.uk> <20190617130357.41204ff7@kemnade.info> <20190617114048.GN5316@sirena.org.uk> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:40:48 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:03:57PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > Mark Brown wrote: =20 > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 06:33:14PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote: =20 >=20 > > > Why is this a good fix and not defining the supported voltages? These > > > look like fairly standard linear range regulators. =20 >=20 > > I am fixing the definition of the two regulators in the patch. > > I am defining them as continuous.=20 > > Voltage ranges are defined in > > arch/arm/boot/dts/twl4030.dtsi > > Only the continuous flag is missing. =20 >=20 > > Is there anything else do you want to be defined? =20 >=20 > These regulators are not continuous regulators as far as I can see, they > are normal linear range regulators and so should have their voltages > enumerable like any other linear range regulator. Citing tps65950 trm page 55: The device contains three switch-mode power supplies (SMPS): =E2=80=A2 VDD1: 1.2-A, buck DC/DC converter (VOUT =3D 0.6 V to 1.45 V, in s= teps of 12.5 mV) =E2=80=A2 VDD2: 600-mA buck DC/DC converter (VOUT =3D 0.6 V to 1.45 V, in s= teps of 12.5 mV, and 1.5 V as a single programmable value) you are right, they are not really continuous. So should I add these 68 steps they have as a voltage list? I think they are nearly continuous, so we should IMHO rather take that not that strict. I guess there are no really continuous regulators, all have steps as voltage is specified in a limited resolution. So what is the exact meaning of that flag here? I think it is common sense to specify these regulators as continuous. Max and min values are already in arch/arm/boot/dts/twl4030.dtsi. Regards, Andreas