[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFRkauBzvdGrYizNZXivrzCdQ0btUamFL2hLjLX4rzS6fWhsWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 20:13:53 +0800
From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
To: Bengt Jönsson <bengt.g.jonsson@...ricsson.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Yvan FILLION <yvan.fillion@...ricsson.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: ab8500: Fix get_mode for shared mode regulators
> I guess what you don't like with the current approach is that the driver
> returns REGULATOR_MODE_IDLE in some cases where the mode register is set to
> LP. But I think, with patch applied, the control may be wrong in some cases
> because the regulator framework will call get_mode and see that the mode is
> already correct and not call set_mode so lp_mode_req will not get updated. I
I got your point now.
My point is get_mode() should always return "correct" status by
reading register value.
And as you mentioned, regulator_set_mode() did check current mode and won't call
set_mode callback if current mode is the same as the target mode.
And that is why this patch won't work.
However, Make get_mode() return "incorrect" status to avoid above
issue looks wrong to me.
Regards,
Axel
--
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