From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de>
To: Alex Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
Cc: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
Andrew Chew <AChew@nvidia.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 v3] pwm_bl: Add support for backlight enable regulator
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 08:10:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130306071040.GC2436@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5136CC88.6080200@nvidia.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1874 bytes --]
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:56:40PM +0900, Alex Courbot wrote:
> On 03/06/2013 01:20 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >On 03/05/2013 07:18 PM, Alex Courbot wrote:
> >>On 03/06/2013 08:51 AM, Andrew Chew wrote:
> >>>The backlight enable regulator is specified in the device tree node for
> >>>backlight.
> >
> >>>diff --git a/include/linux/pwm_backlight.h
> >
> >>> struct platform_pwm_backlight_data {
> >>> int pwm_id;
> >>>+ struct regulator *en_supply;
> >>
> >>You should not have this here. Platform data is supposed to provide the
> >>necessary information for the driver to resolve the resource - not the
> >>resource itself.
> >...
> >>There is one catch though: in case you don't want to use a regulator,
> >>and thus have none defined, regulator_get() will return -EPROBE_DEFER,
> >>so you cannot distinguish between "no regulator needed" and "supplier
> >>not ready yet" and your driver will always *require* a regulator. So at
> >>the end of the day you might still need a "use_enable_regulator" in the
> >>platform data to explicitly ask for probe() to look for it. This
> >>variable would also be set by parse_dt() if the "enable-supply" property
> >>exists.
> >
> >A driver that requires a regulator always requires that regulator. If a
> >particular board doesn't have SW control over the power source, you're
> >supposed to provide a dummy (fixed) regulator so that the driver doesn't
> >care about the difference.
>
> That's good to know, thanks. So does this mean that Andrew should
> make the enable regulator mandatory and update current users to
> provide a dummy one?
That would be the right thing to do. I was planning to move all users of
pwm-backlight to use PWM lookup tables as well at some point (in order
to get rid of the legacy pwm_request() calls), so maybe we can do both
in one go.
Thierry
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-06 7:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-05 23:51 Andrew Chew
2013-03-06 2:18 ` Alex Courbot
2013-03-06 2:41 ` Andrew Chew
2013-03-06 4:53 ` Alex Courbot
2013-03-06 7:00 ` Thierry Reding
2013-03-06 8:37 ` Alex Courbot
2013-03-06 10:11 ` Thierry Reding
2013-03-06 4:20 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-06 4:56 ` Alex Courbot
2013-03-06 7:10 ` Thierry Reding [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=20130306071040.GC2436@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de \
--to=thierry.reding@avionic-design.de \
--cc=AChew@nvidia.com \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
/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®