From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754877AbbGQFiN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 17 Jul 2015 01:38:13 -0400
Received: from mail-pd0-f181.google.com ([209.85.192.181]:33495 "EHLO
	mail-pd0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751706AbbGQFiL (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 17 Jul 2015 01:38:11 -0400
Message-ID: <55A894BC.8070401@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 11:08:04 +0530
From: Vaibhav Hiremath <vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
CC: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com,
        sameo@linux.intel.com, lee.jones@linaro.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] regulator: 88pm800: Add support for configuration
 of dual phase on BUCK1
References: <1437070618-21330-1-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> <1437070618-21330-6-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> <20150716203232.GA1602@sirena.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20150716203232.GA1602@sirena.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org



On Friday 17 July 2015 02:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:46:58PM +0530, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote:
>
>>   	.disable		= regulator_disable_regmap,
>>   	.is_enabled		= regulator_is_enabled_regmap,
>>   	.get_current_limit	= pm800_get_current_limit,
>> +	.set_current_limit	= pm800_set_current_limit,
>
> set_current_limit() isn't the right interface to use for this, this is
> something that depends on the physical design of the system rather than
> something that limits the current.  It should be a DT property of its
> own.  There are some other PMICs with similar functions but it's not
> clear yet how generic the configuration mechanism is.
>

Hmmm,
Yeah, right. This is depends on physical design. And not the regulator
current limit.

Earlier, I had submitted DT based approach, but was MFD DT property.
Which is not correct, do you think regulator DT property is the right
approach?

Below is going to be my approach -

pmic1: 88pm860@30 {
	compatible = "marvell,88pm800";
	...
	regulators {
		compatible = "marvell,88pm80x-regulator";

		marvell,88pm860-buck1-dualphase-en;

		buck1: buck1 {
			...
		};
		...
	};
};


Thanks,
Vaibhav