[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <516C2905.8000200@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 19:21:25 +0300
From: Andrii Tseglytskyi <andrii.tseglytskyi@...com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>,
linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1] regulator: core: introduce regulator chain locking scheme
Hi Mark,
On 04/15/2013 06:50 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> In addition, such locking scheme allows to have access to the supplier
>> regulator API from inside child's (consumer) regulator API.
> I've still not seen any use case articulated for doing this...
Use case is introduced in ABB series:
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg88293.html
During voltage scaling we would like to have the following sequence:
cpufreq_cpu0
|
|---> set_voltage(ABB)
|
|->set_voltage(AVS)
|
|-->set_voltage(smps123)
Where smps123 is a regulator, connected ot i2c bus. In this particular
case "regulator chain" guarantees proper order of calls of voltage
scaling sequence.
Regards,
Andrii
--
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