From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: boot_on regulator constraint vs. regulator-boot-on DT property
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 19:26:13 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FE27835.5070705@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120620234648.GE4037@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
On 06/20/2012 05:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:55:37PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>
>> include/linux/regulator/machine.h says:
>
>>> * @boot_on: Set if the regulator is enabled when the system is
>>> initially * started. If the regulator is not enabled
>>> by the hardware or * bootloader then it will be
>>> enabled when the constraints are * applied.
>
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt says:
>
>>> - regulator-boot-on: bootloader/firmware enabled regulator
>
>> ... and of_regulator.c sets the boot_on constraint based on this
>> property.
>
>> The former quote implies that this is a flag to tell Linux to
>> turn on the regulator when it's first registered, whereas the
>> latter quote implies that it's guaranteeing the state that
>> previous SW placed the regulator into already.
>
>> I assume the documentation from machine.h is correct, and I
>> should send a patch to make regulator.txt match it?
>
> There's no great inconsistency between the two, this is only
> supposed to be used for supplies which are already enabled on boot
Hmm. Perhaps I was misreading machine.h, and "when the system is
initially started" refers to the first firmware start, rather than
when /Linux/ starts. If so, then yes I can see it isn't really
inconsistent.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-21 1:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-20 20:55 boot_on regulator constraint vs. regulator-boot-on DT property Stephen Warren
2012-06-20 23:46 ` Mark Brown
2012-06-21 1:26 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2012-06-21 9:12 ` Mark Brown
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=4FE27835.5070705@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@ti.com \
/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