[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180530103720.GH6920@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 11:37:20 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator
bindings
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:23:20PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > + qcom,drms-mode-max-microamps = <10000 1000000>;
> Things look pretty good to me now. I'm still hesitant about the whole
> need to list the modes twice (once using the unordered
> "regulator-allowed-modes" and once to match up against the ordered
> "qcom,drms-mode-max-microamps"). I'm also still of the opinion that
> the whole "drms-mode-max-microamps" ought to be a standard property
> (not a qcom specific one) and handled in the regulator core.
I'm confused as to why we are specifying the maximum current the device
can deliver in a given mode in the DT - surely that's a fixed property
of the hardware?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists