[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220418121135.923353254@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 14:13:24 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Bakker <xc-racer2@...e.ca>,
Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.4 27/63] regulator: wm8994: Add an off-on delay for WM8994 variant
From: Jonathan Bakker <xc-racer2@...e.ca>
[ Upstream commit 92d96b603738ec4f35cde7198c303ae264dd47cb ]
As per Table 130 of the wm8994 datasheet at [1], there is an off-on
delay for LDO1 and LDO2. In the wm8958 datasheet [2], I could not
find any reference to it. I could not find a wm1811 datasheet to
double-check there, but as no one has complained presumably it works
without it.
This solves the issue on Samsung Aries boards with a wm8994 where
register writes fail when the device is powered off and back-on
quickly.
[1] https://statics.cirrus.com/pubs/proDatasheet/WM8994_Rev4.6.pdf
[2] https://statics.cirrus.com/pubs/proDatasheet/WM8958_v3.5.pdf
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Bakker <xc-racer2@...e.ca>
Acked-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/CY4PR04MB056771CFB80DC447C30D5A31CB1D9@CY4PR04MB0567.namprd04.prod.outlook.com
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
drivers/regulator/wm8994-regulator.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/wm8994-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/wm8994-regulator.c
index cadea0344486..40befdd9dfa9 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/wm8994-regulator.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/wm8994-regulator.c
@@ -71,6 +71,35 @@ static const struct regulator_ops wm8994_ldo2_ops = {
};
static const struct regulator_desc wm8994_ldo_desc[] = {
+ {
+ .name = "LDO1",
+ .id = 1,
+ .type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE,
+ .n_voltages = WM8994_LDO1_MAX_SELECTOR + 1,
+ .vsel_reg = WM8994_LDO_1,
+ .vsel_mask = WM8994_LDO1_VSEL_MASK,
+ .ops = &wm8994_ldo1_ops,
+ .min_uV = 2400000,
+ .uV_step = 100000,
+ .enable_time = 3000,
+ .off_on_delay = 36000,
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ },
+ {
+ .name = "LDO2",
+ .id = 2,
+ .type = REGULATOR_VOLTAGE,
+ .n_voltages = WM8994_LDO2_MAX_SELECTOR + 1,
+ .vsel_reg = WM8994_LDO_2,
+ .vsel_mask = WM8994_LDO2_VSEL_MASK,
+ .ops = &wm8994_ldo2_ops,
+ .enable_time = 3000,
+ .off_on_delay = 36000,
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ },
+};
+
+static const struct regulator_desc wm8958_ldo_desc[] = {
{
.name = "LDO1",
.id = 1,
@@ -172,9 +201,16 @@ static int wm8994_ldo_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
* regulator core and we need not worry about it on the
* error path.
*/
- ldo->regulator = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev,
- &wm8994_ldo_desc[id],
- &config);
+ if (ldo->wm8994->type == WM8994) {
+ ldo->regulator = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev,
+ &wm8994_ldo_desc[id],
+ &config);
+ } else {
+ ldo->regulator = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev,
+ &wm8958_ldo_desc[id],
+ &config);
+ }
+
if (IS_ERR(ldo->regulator)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(ldo->regulator);
dev_err(wm8994->dev, "Failed to register LDO%d: %d\n",
--
2.35.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists