[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140611135448.GH5099@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:54:48 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
sameo@...ux.intel.com, lee.jones@...aro.org, lgirdwood@...il.com,
perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.de, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Do not control clocking
from regulator
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:59:26AM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 07:43:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > IIRC this was deliberately coded in this fashion on advice from the
> > hardware engineers - there was more going on with that register than
> > there might at first appear and some actual sync with the LDO. I
> > believe there was some different process to follow (possibly just
> > setting this mode all the time) when using an external regulator, though
> > it's also possible the hardware guys were just unsure at the time.
> I have had a good chat with the hardware engineers here and they
> are pretty adamant that the only constraint here is that we
> should never enable SUBSYS without 1.8V being supplied to the
> core.
OK, that sounds like the advice when the device was first produced was
not accurate - might be worth checking your datasheets here. Might also
be worth updating the commit log.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists