[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161025143304.GW17252@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:33:04 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
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
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 02:55:48PM +0200, Axel Haslam wrote:
> To be able to use regulator to handle the overcurrent pin, i need to be able
> to somehow retrieve the over current pin state from the regulator driver.
What makes you say that, none of the existing users need this?
> As i was trying your suggestion, i remembered why i thought i should use
> mode instead of status: Status seems to be for internal regulator driver use,
> there is no regulator_get_status, function and REGULATOR_STATUS_* are defined
> in driver.h and not in consumer.h as REGULATOR_MODE_*
> Would you be ok if i allow consumers to get the status via a new
> "regulator_get_status" call?
What would they do with this information that they can't do with the
existing error notification?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists