[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKXjFTONo6N5A2UDbk3HzpK-zCOa16yyww-RMj-+EAfe3dac7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:53:22 +0200
From: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>,
David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
manjunath.goudar@...aro.org,
Alexandre Bailon <abailon@...libre.com>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFT v2 09/17] regulator: fixed: Add over current event
Hi Mark,
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 06:46:26PM +0200, ahaslam@...libre.com wrote:
>> From: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
>>
>> Some regulator supplies have an over-current pin that is
>> activated when the hw detects an over current condition.
>> When this happens, the hardware enters a current limited
>> mode.
>
> Please don't mix random enhancements like this into bigger system
> specific RFC serieses, send them separately so they're easier to spot
> and there's no confusion with dependencies and then reference them from
> the system specific series when you post that.
Ok, sorry i had mixed feelings on how to post all of it.
there are several dependencies on the series and i kept
all together to give the context. Do you want me to repost the regulator
changes seperatly? I can do that, but if you don't agree with regulator
handling overcurrent, i will have to move the over current
gpio into the driver, and there is no point on re-posting that seperatly.
Regards
Axel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists