[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130226125006.GA24796@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:50:07 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bengt Jonsson <bengt.g.jonsson@...ricsson.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/73] ARM: ux500: Vsmps3 controlled by SysClkReq1
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 09:44:12AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> Okay, I've just re-read this thread and it appears you're both talking
> about different things.
> Linus is talking about a discussion with Bengt regarding how these
> strange sysclkreq thingies work. When I first read the code they
> appear to be equivalent to GPIO regulators, but in actual fact the
> hardware logic is different on enable/disable. So they probably don't
> belong in regulator code at all.
> Where as, Mark is complaining about how the regulators are initialised
> by lots of magic register writes during init. Although, comments are
I'm actually complaining about both things.
> inserted for each of the values, they're by no means exhaustive and
> aren't really even helpful if you don't have the uber-s3cr3t design
> specification. What he would like to see is that most of this stuff
> being handled by the framework. Some of this stuff is clearly only
> setting voltages and power-states and the like.
Right, it's the voltages and so on - the stuff that's clearly already in
the framework domain.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists