From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] x86,mrst: Intel Medfield over-current detection patch Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 16:19:21 +0000 Message-ID: <20110208161921.GB14959@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20110125143454.10480.5156.stgit@bob.linux.org.uk> <20110207195843.GA20970@srcf.ucam.org> <20110208104535.71a4bb12@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20110208135228.GA11302@srcf.ucam.org> <20110208140800.5001fb0a@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20110208154916.GB13436@ericsson.com> <20110208155629.GA14523@srcf.ucam.org> <20110208160929.4b410495@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:45472 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754861Ab1BHQT2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Feb 2011 11:19:28 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110208160929.4b410495@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alan Cox Cc: Guenter Roeck , "platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org" On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:09:29PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > Ok, if the hardware has no mechanism for reporting the instantaneous > > draw then I can see it not working well in an hwmon sense. But I'd > > really prefer to see this look far more generic than it does - surely > > other hardware has similar functionality? > > I've not seen any - not anything genericisable anyway. I guess in theory > you could dramatically extend the regulator API to do power draw > management, bus current monitoring and overcurrent callbacks but I'm not > sure it would make any sense. What you do with such events and how you > manage it is incredibly platform specific. > > In the PC world it's not so bad because overcurrent is a fault state - > you whine about it and either shut down or cross fingers and keep going. > In embedded devices it's not that simple and it is actively managed. Yeah, fair enough. I'll queue this up. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org