From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
Cc: broonie@kernel.org, rob.herring@calxeda.com,
mark.rutland@arm.com, rob@landley.net,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] regulator: core: add support for configuring turn-on time through constraints
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:17:07 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5230A593.9010401@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1378904331-5665-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com>
On 09/11/2013 06:58 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> The Turn-on time of the regulator depends on the regulator device's
> electrical characteristics. Sometimes regulator turn-on time also
> depends on the capacitive load on the given platform and it can be
> more than the datasheet value.
>
> The driver provides the enable-time as per datasheet.
>
> Add support for configure the enable ramp time through regulator
> constraints so that regulator core can take this value for enable
> time for that regulator.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt
> - regulator-ramp-delay: ramp delay for regulator(in uV/uS)
> For hardwares which support disabling ramp rate, it should be explicitly
> intialised to zero (regulator-ramp-delay = <0>) for disabling ramp delay.
> +- regulator-enable-ramp-delay: Turn-on time for regulator(in uSec). This is
> + the time time taken to reach within some proportion of the target voltage
> + from off state.
This is still a bit unclear. What proportion of the target voltage?
There's no mention that this describes the delay due to the
board/environment rather than the delay due to the internal operation of
the regulator itself. How about:
- regulator-enable-ramp-delay: The time taken, in uSec, for the supply
rail to reach the target voltage, plus/minus whatever tolerance the
board design requires, once the regulator output itself has ramped up.
This value is in addition to whatever built-in ramp time is inherent in
the regulator's own internal design or configuration. This property
describes the additional ramp time required due to board design issues
such as trace capacitance and load on the supply.
That's text repeats "additional" a bit, but I think describes the
situation correctly?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-11 17:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-11 12:58 [PATCH V2] regulator: core: add support for configuring turn-on time through constraints Laxman Dewangan
2013-09-11 17:17 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2013-09-11 17:46 ` Laxman Dewangan
2013-09-11 17:46 ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-11 18:09 ` Laxman Dewangan
2013-09-11 17:59 ` Stephen Warren
2013-09-12 10:12 ` 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=5230A593.9010401@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
/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