[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48164f18-34d0-4053-a416-2bb63aaae74b@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 18:03:03 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>,
Srini Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/18] arm64: dts: qcom: qrb5165-rb5: model the PMU of
the QCA6391
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 09:32:06PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> + vreg_pmu_aon_0p59: ldo1 {
> + regulator-name = "vreg_pmu_aon_0p59";
> + regulator-min-microvolt = <540000>;
> + regulator-max-microvolt = <840000>;
> + };
That's a *very* wide voltage range for a supply that's got a name ending
in _0_p59 which sounds a lot like it should be fixed at 0.59V.
Similarly for a bunch of the other supplies, and I'm not seeing any
evidence that the consumers do any voltage changes here? There doesn't
appear to be any logic here, I'm not convinced these are validated or
safe constraints.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists