[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200617114721.GD4613@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:47:22 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
Cc: agross@...nel.org, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
lgirdwood@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
Nisha Kumari <nishakumari@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, kgunda@...eaurora.org,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] regulator: qcom: Add labibb driver
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 05:12:35PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote:
> I understand from a pure regulators' correctness point of view,
> ENABLE_CTL should be the one checked there, so I can change the patch
> as you suggested, but there seems to be some performance penalty
> there.
I thought the goal was to have the performance penalty to ensure that
the regulator had actually started?
> > > The WARN_ON? This was suggested by Bjorn to catch the case where the
> > > DT binding for a PMIC instantiates only one of the regulators.
> > No, this whole loop - why this whole match and get child stuff?
> This loop mechanism is what I saw in the other qcom regulators
> upstream, so thought it was an acceptable way.
> For the two children nodes, do you recommend another mechanism to get
> and validate both nodes?
I don't understand what you mean by "two children nodes" here?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists