[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56FD7379.2000307@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 00:29:05 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn@...o.se>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"Stephen Warren" <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Gandhar Dighe <gdighe@...dia.com>,
"Stuart Yates" <syates@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based
on platform behavior
On Friday 01 April 2016 12:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:09:18AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>
>> The setting for observed value is not there for device configuration.
>> Device support 5mV/us and 100mV/us.
>> We observed 50mV/us when setting device to 100mV/us.
> But you said the device had a configuration for 50mV/us?
I looked for last 4 communication and tried to find out if any typo on
mail so that I can correct but did not found.
/**
Here is the case,
PMIC supports 2 ramp time configurations 5mv/us and 100mV/us. This is
supported with some specific capacitance in rail output per
recommendation from PMIC
**/
So may be more older may have..
But here is the stuff without typo ;-)
Device supports 5mV/us and 100mV/us which is not in observed value.
And this is the only reason for requesting of second property.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists