From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932297AbcIAVJt (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:09:49 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:47656 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753088AbcIAVJl (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:09:41 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 20:24:19 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Douglas Anderson Cc: lgirdwood@gmail.com, mka@chromium.org, briannorris@chromium.org, javier@dowhile0.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20160901192419.GL5967@sirena.org.uk> References: <1472617277-30814-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HBg0C3yr6HVa1ZCc" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1472617277-30814-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> X-Cookie: Beware of computerized fortune-tellers! User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a01:348:6:8808:fab::3 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: pwm: Add support for a fixed delay after duty cycle changes X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk); Unknown failure Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --HBg0C3yr6HVa1ZCc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:21:15PM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote: > A change of the duty cycle doesn't necessarily cause an immediate switch > to the target voltage. On many PWM regulators there is a fixed "settle > time" (irrespective of the jump size) that we need to wait after an > upward jump. This change introduces the device tree property > "settle-time-up-us" which allows us to specify a fixed delay after a > voltage increase. Why is this specific to regulators implemented with PWM controllers? Most DCDCs have a PWM element and the concept of a hard time limit for transition rather than a ramp rate doesn't seem like it'd be unique. --HBg0C3yr6HVa1ZCc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXyIBiAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQOD8H/0qFr0dDOkmyN+xoLzbttad0 A8vebSkbaWa2XxU5XCCFbm0r06OqEOWoEOsGlw8tvDAouFDOJjhQcyp6X46PQ0Bq dcR7BNXyKUDjeiUcMs+WeKSJ9j5eIUkaeoquV5q1IJag0q3p8Z0ZAp5bJofS41DA dxLdvOwNuPthl0Feo614a7wSV8wyjyItcEDgit58Q49bTnRxFHWVWobXTQNghlAh FuvAfFLMJWL9YZF42IwwDqeN+cAhkJNreCLMNP+gHoSk94Mxllsjs3/NKnwUJ8Un SlZjKP0fBXhDjk7AMBe2A4TtxWEorYAJ2SLTg1YaMnue+PB/RNDoEGiElT4ada0= =mzHm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HBg0C3yr6HVa1ZCc--