From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: core: Resolve supply earlier
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 11:59:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <570B8376.6030505@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1460038959-21592-1-git-send-email-thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Hi Thierry,
On 07/04/16 15:22, Thierry Reding wrote:
> From: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>
> Subsequent patches will need access to the parent supply from within the
> set_machine_constraints() function to properly implement bypass mode. If
> the parent supply hasn't been resolved by that time the voltage can't be
> queried.
>
> Also, by making sure the supply is resolved early most of the changes in
> set_machine_constraints() don't have to be undone if resolution fails.
>
> Suggested-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> ---
> drivers/regulator/core.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index 2786d251b1cc..cc0333a79924 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -3972,18 +3972,27 @@ regulator_register(const struct regulator_desc *regulator_desc,
>
> dev_set_drvdata(&rdev->dev, rdev);
>
> + if (init_data && init_data->supply_regulator)
> + rdev->supply_name = init_data->supply_regulator;
> + else if (regulator_desc->supply_name)
> + rdev->supply_name = regulator_desc->supply_name;
> +
> + /*
> + * set_machine_constraints() needs the supply to be resolved in order
> + * to support querying the current voltage in bypass mode. Resolve it
> + * here to more easily handle deferred probing.
> + */
> + ret = regulator_resolve_supply(rdev);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto scrub;
> +
Thanks for sending this. However, I think that calling
regulator_resolve_supply() can cause a deadlock, because the
regulator_list_mutex is held at this point and
regulator_resolve_supply() calls regulator_dev_lookup() which may try to
request the mutex again.
So may be we need to move this call after the call to
regulator_of_get_init_data() before we acquire the mutex.
Also, if we add this call, then I am wondering if we still need ...
class_for_each_device(®ulator_class, NULL, NULL,
regulator_register_resolve_supply);
Cheers
Jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-11 10:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-07 14:22 Thierry Reding
2016-04-07 14:22 ` [PATCH 2/5] regulator: core: Use parent voltage from the supply when bypassed Thierry Reding
2016-04-12 6:31 ` Applied "regulator: core: Use parent voltage from the supply when bypassed" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2016-04-07 14:22 ` [PATCH 3/5] regulator: helpers: Ensure bypass register field matches ON value Thierry Reding
2016-04-22 10:49 ` Applied "regulator: helpers: Ensure bypass register field matches ON value" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2016-04-07 14:22 ` [PATCH 4/5] regulator: as3722: Add bypass support for LDO6 Thierry Reding
2016-04-11 16:15 ` Applied "regulator: as3722: Add bypass support for LDO6" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2016-04-07 14:22 ` [PATCH 5/5] regulator: as3722: Constify regulator ops Thierry Reding
2016-04-11 16:15 ` Applied "regulator: as3722: Constify regulator ops" to the regulator tree Mark Brown
2016-04-11 10:59 ` Jon Hunter [this message]
2016-04-11 11:46 ` [PATCH 1/5] regulator: core: Resolve supply earlier Thierry Reding
2016-04-11 12:19 ` Jon Hunter
2016-04-11 12:49 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-11 14:03 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-04-11 12:58 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-11 13:09 ` Thierry Reding
2016-04-11 13:45 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-04-11 13:57 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-11 14:07 ` Thierry Reding
2016-04-11 14:32 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-11 14:49 ` Thierry Reding
2016-04-11 15:50 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-11 13:56 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-11 14:03 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-11 14:11 ` Thierry Reding
2016-04-11 14:16 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-19 10:16 ` Jon Hunter
2016-04-19 11:03 ` Thierry Reding
2016-04-19 15:40 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-19 16:09 ` Jon Hunter
2016-04-20 15:21 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-21 15:34 ` 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=570B8376.6030505@nvidia.com \
--to=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=javier@osg.samsung.com \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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
Powered by JetHome