[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AM5PR1001MB0994377F69ED2EFF2BEB580380500@AM5PR1001MB0994.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 13:13:10 +0000
From: Adam Thomson <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>
To: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@...gutronix.de>,
Adam Thomson <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>
CC: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>,
"linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"bgolaszewski@...libre.com" <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
"andrew@...id.au" <andrew@...id.au>,
"linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"joel@....id.au" <joel@....id.au>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 3/6] dt-bindings: mfd: da9062: add regulator voltage
selection documentation
On 17 December 2019 12:31, Marco Felsch wrote:
> On 19-12-17 09:53, Adam Thomson wrote:
> > On 17 December 2019 09:01, Marco Felsch wrote:
> >
> > > > > The enabel control signal is always available, please check [1] table
> > > > > 63. There is a mux in front of the enable pin so:
> > > > >
> > > > > +-------------
> > > > > Seq. |\ | Regulator
> > > > > GPI1 | \ |
> > > > > GPI2 | | -- > Enable
> > > > > GPI3 | / |
> > > > > |/ .
> > > > > .
> > > > > .
> > > > >
> > > > > Adam please correct me if this is wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Yes the register can always be configured regardless of the associated pin
> > > > configuration, but if say GPIO1 was configured as a GPO but a regulator was
> > > > configured to use GPIO1 as its GPI control mechanism, the output signal
> from
> > > > GPIO1 would be ignored, the sequencer control would not have any effect
> and
> > > > you're simply left with manual I2C control. Really we shouldn't be getting
> into
> > > > that situation though. If a GPIO is to be used as a regulator control signal
> > > > then it should be marked as such and I don't think we should be able to use
> that
> > > > pin for anything other than regulator control.
> > >
> > > I see, so we have to guarantee that the requested gpio is configured as
> > > input. This can be done by:
> >
> > This is one of the reasons I thought this was better suited to being done in the
> > pinctrl/pinmux side. If you configure the GPIO as for regulator control then
> > the code can automatically configure the GPIO for input. That doesn't then
> need
> > to be in the regulator driver.
>
> I still don't prefer that way.. pls check my arguments I already made
> and I don't wanna repeat it again.
Yes, I read your arguments but still can't agree :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists