mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Aleksandr Frid <afrid@nvidia.com>
Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>,
	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
	"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..."
	<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous mode
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:53:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160708085338.GT6247@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <364098370f214216ad14eda6487687e9@HQMAIL106.nvidia.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2361 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:43:33PM +0000, Aleksandr Frid wrote:

I'm not entirely sure what's wrong with your mail client here but your
mails are essentially illegible.  There appears to be some combination
of top posting, reflowing quoted content to remove line breaks and extra
levels of quoting.

> >>
> In the case that you don't need multiple steps then don't specify a regulator-ramp-delay, just a pwm-regulator-settle-us.
> >>
> Agreed
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dianders@google.com [mailto:dianders@google.com] On Behalf Of Doug Anderson
> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 11:32 AM
> To: Aleksandr Frid
> Cc: Laxman Dewangan; Mark Brown; Boris Brezillon; Lee Jones; Brian Norris; open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC...; Heiko Stuebner; Thierry Reding; Liam Girdwood; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous mode
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Aleksandr Frid <afrid@nvidia.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >>>
> > In that case we should probably add a new PWM regulator property and not abuse the existing one.  Maybe you use "pwm-regulator-settle-us"
> > or something?
> >>>
> > Looks reasonable to me.
> >
> >>>
> > actually the right thing is probably to implement 
> > 'regulator-ramp-delay' as doing several small steps in that case
> >>>
> > Ramp delay uV/us  is not a "real" metric for some PWM regulators with exponential transition -- as opposite to fixed slew-rate linear transition on other regulators. So splitting transition into multiple steps to implement artificial  (in this case) metric seems questionable.
> 
> In the case that you don't need multiple steps then don't specify a regulator-ramp-delay, just a pwm-regulator-settle-us.
> 
> ...the suggestion for multiple steps is because (so I'm told) it helps avoid overshoot or undershoot problems.  In general the whole point of ramping a regulator slowly is to avoid overshoot or undershoot problems.  The "regulator-ramp-delay" property in Linux is a little odd because it sort of "describes" the ramp delay and sort of "sets"
> the ramp delay.  Many PMICs allow you to set how fast the regulator will ramp and this property is used to specify how the register in the PMIC should be set.  However, it is also used as the actual delay in Linux.
> 
> 
> -Doug

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-08  8:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-06 18:42 Douglas Anderson
2016-07-07  8:36 ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-07-07 16:30   ` Doug Anderson
2016-07-07 18:23     ` Aleksandr Frid
2016-07-07 18:31       ` Doug Anderson
2016-07-07 18:43         ` Aleksandr Frid
2016-07-08  8:53           ` Mark Brown [this message]
2016-07-07 10:01 ` Applied "regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous mode" to the regulator tree Mark Brown

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=20160708085338.GT6247@sirena.org.uk \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=afrid@nvidia.com \
    --cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
    --cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®