[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y6whZ50Lz07xG/R1@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2022 11:58:47 +0100
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>, agross@...nel.org,
andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org,
lgirdwood@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
dianders@...omium.org, Johan Hovold <johan+kernel@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] regulator: dt-bindings: qcom,rpmh: Indicate
regulator-allow-set-load dependencies
On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 11:37:06AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/09/2022 22:49, Andrew Halaney wrote:
> > For RPMH regulators it doesn't make sense to indicate
> > regulator-allow-set-load without saying what modes you can switch to,
> > so be sure to indicate a dependency on regulator-allowed-modes.
> >
> > In general this is true for any regulators that are setting modes
> > instead of setting a load directly, for example RPMH regulators. A
> > counter example would be RPM based regulators, which set a load
> > change directly instead of a mode change. In the RPM case
> > regulator-allow-set-load alone is sufficient to describe the regulator
> > (the regulator can change its output current, here's the new load),
> > but in the RPMH case what valid operating modes exist must also be
> > stated to properly describe the regulator (the new load is this, what
> > is the optimum mode for this regulator with that load, let's change to
> > that mode now).
> >
> > With this in place devicetree validation can catch issues like this:
> >
> > /mnt/extrassd/git/linux-next/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8350-hdk.dtb: pm8350-rpmh-regulators: ldo5: 'regulator-allowed-modes' is a dependency of 'regulator-allow-set-load'
> > From schema: /mnt/extrassd/git/linux-next/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/qcom,rpmh-regulator.yaml
>
> Andrew,
>
> This patch was merged therefore we started seeing such warnings. Any
> plans to actually fix them?
Didn't Doug already do that?
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220829164952.2672848-1-dianders@chromium.org/
Johan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists