From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936031AbcIPQdX (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:33:23 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:36564 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935556AbcIPQdP (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:33:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 17:32:53 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Matthias Kaehlcke Cc: lgirdwood@gmail.com, Douglas Anderson , briannorris@chromium.org, javier@dowhile0.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20160916163253.GA10189@sirena.org.uk> References: <20160906190524.GB79728@google.com> <20160912185633.GH27946@sirena.org.uk> <20160913172140.GC62872@google.com> <20160915143945.GJ27974@sirena.org.uk> <20160915180223.GE62872@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160915180223.GE62872@google.com> X-Cookie: You are number 6! Who is number one? 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 v4 4/4] regulator: Prevent falling too fast 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 --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:02:23AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > El Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 03:39:45PM +0100 Mark Brown ha dit: > > The obvious question here is how the OVP hardware knows about the new > > voltage and why we're bodging this in the regulator core rather than in > > the OVP hardware. > The OVP hardware is part of the regulator and the regulator is not > notified directly about voltage changes. The regulator transforms the > PWM input into DC output and does the OVP internally with the limits > described above. So the PWM is just configuring this external regulator chip (which doesn't seem to be described in DT...) and that's just incredibly bad at coping with voltage changes? It does sound rather like we ought to be representing this chip directly in case it needs other workarounds. --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJX3B60AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQxBMH/R6+6Z1rl+sTvBDbGQzSbSwv WAD55Ra3AJx/zmjLbbFlCrNKAUhEQUJfLE6SnsQ9y5bIet8vCH7cBQyviH/L0mtt rVEfQZucJS3j8IDPsmaW2qLwLGGre+/J8bNRleI1GIfz2W+2/1rOKDtMP1uY44lA l0Pc0JewmKJ5H2kucOyURl87HruXXW9foPaMTdr6dYgBvmmpwClFjOaP+FZUF0fy zVXEU1li9jBzsxX7Sd1KUIFsL8iZVd4062F4QV3gE2oloNVAIyT2znpj4vDrjoBE fm6mI3C7bK8YddHlryV0BpEaWOpfA5cpcWtEjkN3oe6u9OntrzcryaZtbAnkbLc= =PAfU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Nq2Wo0NMKNjxTN9z--