From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lrg@slimlogic.co.uk>,
Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>,
lm-sensors <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] regulator: regulator_get behaviour without CONFIG_REGULATOR set
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 12:57:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100407115710.GB13576@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BBC6B52.5030908@cam.ac.uk>
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 12:24:02PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 04/06/10 19:19, Mark Brown wrote:
> > TBH this seems like a very vanilla use case - there may be some small
> > advantage to representing the internal regulator via the regulator API
> > but that's about the only thing I can think might be a bit odd.
> I wasn't thinking of representing the internal regulator using the regulator
> framework (though if it is externally available I guess that would make sense
> though probably only if anyone is actually using this to supply something else
> - most likely case I can think of is daisy chaining multiple adc's and ensuring
> they have the same reference value).
Like I say, I think this is likely to be a small benefit from that. The
rest of what you're doing seems very vanilla.
> Nothing new here, but there will be a number of consumers that care about changes
> in voltage (rather than typically controlling it.) Hence I'm welcoming the change
> just agreed upon.
Note that you're not going to see any difference you can actually use
here - you still have to handle the possibility that you've got an
actual regulator but for some reason fail to read a voltage from it
which is the same behaviour that you see from the dummy regulator.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-07 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <2122967437.461270223106350.JavaMail.root@mail.savoirfairelinux.com>
2010-04-02 15:47 ` Jerome Oufella
2010-04-02 16:00 ` Mark Brown
2010-04-02 16:44 ` [lm-sensors] " Jean Delvare
2010-04-02 18:51 ` Mark Brown
2010-04-02 19:30 ` Jean Delvare
2010-04-02 20:45 ` Mark Brown
2010-04-03 15:37 ` Jean Delvare
2010-04-05 13:23 ` Mark Brown
2010-04-06 12:04 ` Jonathan Cameron
2010-04-06 15:27 ` Liam Girdwood
2010-04-06 16:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2010-04-06 18:19 ` Mark Brown
2010-04-07 9:50 ` Liam Girdwood
2010-04-07 11:24 ` Jonathan Cameron
2010-04-07 11:57 ` Mark Brown [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100407115710.GB13576@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=jic23@cam.ac.uk \
--cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
--cc=lrg@slimlogic.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®