[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F95495D.4050508@stericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:21:49 +0200
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...ricsson.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mattias WALLIN <mattias.wallin@...ricsson.com>,
Jonas ABERG <jonas.aberg@...ricsson.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Keep boot_on regulators powered during
init
On 04/23/2012 01:05 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 12:52:05PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>
>> I realize that using boot_on, which has been around for quite some
>> time could have problems. If not using the existing boot_on
>> constraint, do you have an idea of how to accomplish what I want?
>> Should I invent a new constraint option to be used in
>> regulator_init_complete!?
>
> To be honest I don't entirely understand what your goal is at the system
> level - the current idea is that either the regulator will be marked as
> always_on or it should be enabled by a consumer. What is the scenario
> in which neither of these is sufficient?
The consumer do not want to enable the regulator directly from its
device probe routine, it is handled through a scheduled work.
Moreover the regulator shall not be switched off unless the consumer
work decides that this is OK.
So, we actually will have a race were the work _might_ be able to
preventing the late_init_call (regulator_init_complete) from disabling
the regulator if has reached the point were it has enabled the regulator.
Hopes this clarifies the background a bit more.
Kind regards
Ulf Hansson
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists