Re: [PATCH 2/2] regulator: Optimise out noop voltage changes

["Saravana Kannan" <skannan@codeaurora.org>]

Mark Brown wrote:
>> 2. When I was trying to do the above this Sunday, I also noticed what
>> looks like a bug or at least an unpleasant behavior. A consumer's min_uV
>> and max_uV were being updated (for-next around Dec 12th) before calling
>> the producer's set voltage. So, in the above example, if consumer C
>> comes
>> in and asks for (10 - 15), it will prevent the producer voltage from
>> ever
>> changing again. All of consumer A and B's future requests will result in
>> a
>> failure since min_uV > max_uV when you do the consumer aggregation.
>
> I'm sorry I can't parse this at all.  What is a producer?
>
> If the consumers are all asking for incompatible things there's a system
> integration issue and the consumers need to be sorted out; it's
> difficult for the regulator API to do anything safely while everything
> wants incompatible configurations.

Sorry for the confusing explanation. Like I said, I didn't have access to
the code and I was using terms I had in my head. Anyway, wrote a quick
patch and sent it your way. Think of it more as an RFC to explain my point
-- I'm more than willing to implement it differently if you don't like it.

Thanks,
Saravana
-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.