From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: core: Add early supply resolution for a bypassed regulator
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 11:48:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160422104837.GC3217@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461255121-5245-5-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 943 bytes --]
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 05:12:00PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
> A regulator that is in bypass will fail to be registered because we will
> attempt to get the voltage of the regulator (ie. it's bypass voltage)
> before the supply for the regulator has been resolved. Therefore, when
> getting the voltage for a bypassed regulator, if the supply has not been
> resolved, then attempt to resolve it. Additionally, move the setup of
> the regulator's supply name to before the call to
> set_machine_constraints() so that it can be resolved.
The basic pattern here makes sense but rather than doing this
specifically in the case where we have a bypassed supply we didn't
resolve yet I think we should instead always try to resolve the supply
but ignore the error unless we actively need the supply. I'd be
surprised if we didn't run into other cases where we need to do this so
it seems better to try the resolution in one place.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-22 10:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-21 16:11 [PATCH 0/5] regulator: A few fixes for supply resolution Jon Hunter
2016-04-21 16:11 ` [PATCH 1/5] regulator: core: Don't terminate supply resolution early Jon Hunter
2016-04-22 10:49 ` Applied "regulator: core: Don't terminate supply resolution early" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2016-04-21 16:11 ` [PATCH 2/5] regulator: core: Clear the supply pointer if enabling fails Jon Hunter
2016-04-22 10:49 ` Applied "regulator: core: Clear the supply pointer if enabling fails" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2016-04-21 16:11 ` [PATCH 3/5] regulator: core: Move registration of regulator device Jon Hunter
2016-04-22 10:49 ` Applied "regulator: core: Move registration of regulator device" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2016-04-21 16:12 ` [PATCH 4/5] regulator: core: Add early supply resolution for a bypassed regulator Jon Hunter
2016-04-22 10:48 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2016-04-22 11:26 ` Jon Hunter
2016-04-22 13:53 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-25 14:44 ` Jon Hunter
2016-04-25 16:54 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-21 16:12 ` [PATCH 5/5] regulator: helpers: Ensure bypass register field matches ON value Jon Hunter
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=20160422104837.GC3217@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=treding@nvidia.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome