[PATCH 1/2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS

[PATCH 1/2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS

[Charles Keepax]

Restore synchronous probing for Arizona regulators because otherwise
the main MFD driver will not find its core supplies.

As these regulators are built into the CODEC and typically have no DT
representation the regulator framework is unaware of their existence
until the driver probes. These means the probing of the driver needs to
be synchronous to ensure the regulators are not substitued for the dummy
later when the users request them.

Fixes: 259b93b21a9f ("regulator: Set PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS for drivers that existed in 4.14")
Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
---
 drivers/regulator/arizona-ldo1.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/arizona-ldo1.c b/drivers/regulator/arizona-ldo1.c
index a53d8441702a4..b465c0010665a 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/arizona-ldo1.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/arizona-ldo1.c
@@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ static struct platform_driver arizona_ldo1_driver = {
 	.remove = arizona_ldo1_remove,
 	.driver		= {
 		.name	= "arizona-ldo1",
-		.probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS,
+		.probe_type = PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS,
 	},
 };
 
@@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static struct platform_driver madera_ldo1_driver = {
 	.remove = arizona_ldo1_remove,
 	.driver		= {
 		.name	= "madera-ldo1",
-		.probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS,
+		.probe_type = PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS,
 	},
 };
 
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH 2/2] regulator: arizona-micsupp: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS

[Charles Keepax]

Restore synchronous probing for Arizona regulators as the main MFD
relies on the ordering of the devices probing.

As these regulators are built into the CODEC and typically have no DT
representation the regulator framework is unaware of their existence
until the driver probes. These means the probing of the driver needs to
be synchronous to ensure the regulators are not substitued for the dummy
later when the users request them.

Fixes: 259b93b21a9f ("regulator: Set PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS for drivers that existed in 4.14")
Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
---
 drivers/regulator/arizona-micsupp.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/arizona-micsupp.c b/drivers/regulator/arizona-micsupp.c
index ffd8416487eb9..e250e5f3fcbcb 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/arizona-micsupp.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/arizona-micsupp.c
@@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ static struct platform_driver arizona_micsupp_driver = {
 	.probe = arizona_micsupp_probe,
 	.driver		= {
 		.name	= "arizona-micsupp",
-		.probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS,
+		.probe_type = PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS,
 	},
 };
 
@@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ static struct platform_driver madera_micsupp_driver = {
 	.probe = madera_micsupp_probe,
 	.driver		= {
 		.name	= "madera-micsupp",
-		.probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS,
+		.probe_type = PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS,
 	},
 };
 
-- 
2.30.2

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 13:20:46 +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> Restore synchronous probing for Arizona regulators because otherwise
> the main MFD driver will not find its core supplies.
> 
> As these regulators are built into the CODEC and typically have no DT
> representation the regulator framework is unaware of their existence
> until the driver probes. These means the probing of the driver needs to
> be synchronous to ensure the regulators are not substitued for the dummy
> later when the users request them.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/2] regulator: arizona-ldo1: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS
      commit: 557de8d84ae4988b08339032d2f405ef5057e82b
[2/2] regulator: arizona-micsupp: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS
      commit: b65a0a8edba2c0a03e8fdb03b6807132e4166483

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark