| Message ID | 1417087253-12306-3-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com |
|---|---|
| State | Needs Review / ACK, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| robh/checkpatch | warning | total: 1 errors, 0 warnings, 0 lines checked |
| robh/patch-applied | success |
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:20:48PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > +- ena-gpios: GPIO to use for enable control. Actual implementation depends > + on regulator driver. The bindings documentation for given driver describes > + which regulator actually supports it. > +- ena-gpio-open-drain: GPIO is open drain type. I'm relly not a big fan of adding a fixed name property here with no override capability, it means that the naming won't reflect the specific regulator design so closely and in practice for many of the PMICs the GPIO control can do rather more than just control enables and supports reprogramming. The latter case where we've got a signal which can sometimes be simply and enable but sometimes more makes it especially worrying to have the property always be there, it's something that might work in some configurations but could easily be broken if we try to exploit more advanced functionality (things also triggering other configuration changes at the same time). Factoring out the code is good but it seems better to have it be something which drivers can control, for example by having them explicitly specify a property name to use or perhaps a flag to enable the default name. We also need an invert option.
On czw, 2014-11-27 at 18:30 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:20:48PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > +- ena-gpios: GPIO to use for enable control. Actual implementation depends > > + on regulator driver. The bindings documentation for given driver describes > > + which regulator actually supports it. > > +- ena-gpio-open-drain: GPIO is open drain type. > > I'm relly not a big fan of adding a fixed name property here with no > override capability, it means that the naming won't reflect the specific > regulator design so closely and in practice for many of the PMICs the > GPIO control can do rather more than just control enables and supports > reprogramming. The latter case where we've got a signal which can > sometimes be simply and enable but sometimes more makes it especially > worrying to have the property always be there, it's something that might > work in some configurations but could easily be broken if we try to > exploit more advanced functionality (things also triggering other > configuration changes at the same time). I understand your concerns here however I didn't want to overengineer this. Is the same GPIO (on more complex PMICs) used in different contexts? Like enable control and something more in the same time? For example the S5M8767 uses different GPIOs for: 1. enable control - one GPIO per regulator, 2. voltage selection (DVS) - 3 GPIOs total, so there is no benefit in merging this into one common regulator code. > Factoring out the code is good but it seems better to have it be > something which drivers can control, for example by having them > explicitly specify a property name to use or perhaps a flag to enable > the default name. Something like: struct regulator_desc desc { .name = "LDO1 .of_match = of_match_ptr("LDO1"), .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("voltage-regulators"), .ops = &max77686_ldo_ops, + .of_ena_gpio = of_match_ptr("ena-gpios"), ... } ? > We also need an invert option. This is parsed from gpio specifier in DTS: the flags from include/dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h. Thank you for feedback, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > I understand your concerns here however I didn't want to overengineer > this. Is the same GPIO (on more complex PMICs) used in different > contexts? Like enable control and something more in the same time? Yes, and it's often reprogrammable at runtime. > Something like: > struct regulator_desc desc { > .name = "LDO1 > .of_match = of_match_ptr("LDO1"), > .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("voltage-regulators"), > .ops = &max77686_ldo_ops, > + .of_ena_gpio = of_match_ptr("ena-gpios"), > ... > } Yes, and note that this also means existing bindings can use the core code.
On pią, 2014-11-28 at 11:21 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > I understand your concerns here however I didn't want to overengineer > > this. Is the same GPIO (on more complex PMICs) used in different > > contexts? Like enable control and something more in the same time? > > Yes, and it's often reprogrammable at runtime. I have doubts if generalized code could support such configuration... > > > Something like: > > struct regulator_desc desc { > > .name = "LDO1 > > .of_match = of_match_ptr("LDO1"), > > .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("voltage-regulators"), > > .ops = &max77686_ldo_ops, > > + .of_ena_gpio = of_match_ptr("ena-gpios"), > > ... > > } > > Yes, and note that this also means existing bindings can use the core > code. Thanks for idea, Krzysztof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 12:54:27PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On pią, 2014-11-28 at 11:21 +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > I understand your concerns here however I didn't want to overengineer > > > this. Is the same GPIO (on more complex PMICs) used in different > > > contexts? Like enable control and something more in the same time? > > Yes, and it's often reprogrammable at runtime. > I have doubts if generalized code could support such configuration... That's pretty much my point.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt index 4e7ed762b3bb..dad57b3badc7 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt @@ -30,6 +30,10 @@ Optional properties: - regulator-off-in-suspend: regulator should be off in suspend state. - regulator-suspend-microvolt: regulator should be set to this voltage in suspend. +- ena-gpios: GPIO to use for enable control. Actual implementation depends + on regulator driver. The bindings documentation for given driver describes + which regulator actually supports it. +- ena-gpio-open-drain: GPIO is open drain type. Deprecated properties: - regulator-compatible: If a regulator chip contains multiple
Document new properties for regulators (ena-gpios and ena-gpio-open-drain) for enabling control over GPIO. Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)