[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 00:15:01 +0900
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Karel Balej <balejk@...fyz.cz>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
Duje Mihanović <duje.mihanovic@...le.hr>,
~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] regulator: add regulators driver for Marvell
88PM886 PMIC
On Sat, May 04, 2024 at 09:37:06PM +0200, Karel Balej wrote:
> +static const struct regulator_ops pm886_ldo_ops = {
> + .list_voltage = regulator_list_voltage_table,
> + .map_voltage = regulator_map_voltage_iterate,
> + .set_voltage_sel = regulator_set_voltage_sel_regmap,
> + .get_voltage_sel = regulator_get_voltage_sel_regmap,
> + .enable = regulator_enable_regmap,
> + .disable = regulator_disable_regmap,
> + .is_enabled = regulator_is_enabled_regmap,
> + .get_current_limit = pm886_regulator_get_ilim,
Do these regulators actually enforce this limit or is this just a spec
limit beyond which regulation may fail? If it's just a spec limit I'd
not expect this operation to be provided, it's more for a hard limit
where the regulator will detect and act on issues. I don't see an error
interrupt or anything and this would be an unusual feature for a LDO.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists