From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Kamal Wadhwa <kamal.wadhwa@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] regulator: qcom-rpmh: readback voltage/bypass/mode/status set during bootup
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 13:48:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <amNfHiL2W-uLlPjY@sirena.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <gaigrfpfunsqwuxf24uonw4mrkdse4ap3cywi2eg2qdyfgfzsd@hk6zghfqnkty>
On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 04:13:02PM +0530, Kamal Wadhwa wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 05:46:37PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > A get_status() operation should be reading the actual hardware status
> > right now, not driver state - this should be reading whatever the value
> > is right now. If the hardware doesn't support this then just don't
> > provide the operation.
> Actually we are reading from HW what we voted in terms of ENABLE/BYPASS/MODE
> and we are combing these in the `rpmh_regulator_determine_initial_status()`
> to come up with the `vreg->status`at the time of probe.
No, that's not the point. A get_status() operation needs to return the
actual hardware status *now*, not a cached value from some random time
in the past and not something that was written by the driver.
> So, shall I read the HW MODE/BYPSS/ENABLE value in every get_status() call?
If they reflect values that might be dynamically updated by the
hardware, yes. If they are just control registers that the hardware
will not update autonomously they are not suitable for a get_status()
operation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-24 12:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 15:36 [PATCH v5 0/4] regulator: qcom-rpmh: Support RPMH address reads and use it for rpmh-regulators Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-20 15:36 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] soc: qcom: rpmh: Add support to read back resource settings Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-20 15:36 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] regulator: qcom-rpmh: Fix PMIC5 BOB bypass mode handling Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-20 15:36 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] regulator: qcom-rpmh: readback voltage/bypass/mode/status set during bootup Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-22 16:46 ` Mark Brown
2026-07-24 10:43 ` Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-24 12:48 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2026-07-29 19:41 ` Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-29 20:04 ` Mark Brown
2026-07-29 21:58 ` Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-29 23:11 ` Mark Brown
2026-07-30 8:10 ` Kamal Wadhwa
2026-07-31 23:39 ` Mark Brown
2026-07-20 15:36 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] regulator: qcom-rpmh: Fix coding style issues Kamal Wadhwa
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=amNfHiL2W-uLlPjY@sirena.co.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=kamal.wadhwa@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=konradybcio@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
/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®