[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140826071721.GV17528@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 08:17:21 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
Yuvaraj Cd <yuvaraj.lkml@...il.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan@...sung.com>,
Prashanth G <prashanth.g@...sung.com>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
sunil joshi <joshi@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/2] regulator: Add driver for max77802 PMIC PMIC
regulators
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 08:40:40AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas
> > I see, so probably until we have a way to define the operating mode for
> > each regulator using DT we should set the opmode to normal when enabling a
> > regulator independently of the value the hardware register reported on probe.
> > Can you please test the following change [0] so I can post as a proper
> > patch? Doug, Mark do you think that forcing the regulator to opmode normal
> > when enabling is the right solution here?
> IMHO that makes sense.
No, this doesn't make any obvious sense to me at all. Picking normal as
a default if the hardware reads back off due to overlapping
impelementation or something *might* make sense but not overwriting the
hardware state without explicit permission from the machine integration
is a key goal for the regulator API.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists