Thread (14 messages) read the whole thread 14 messages, 5 authors, 2024-09-30

Re: [PATCH v8 0/3] Add of_regulator_get_optional() and Fix MTK Power Domain Driver

From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org>
Date: 2024-09-27 04:01:01
Also in: linux-devicetree, linux-mediatek, linux-pm, lkml

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 11:49 PM Ulf Hansson [off-list ref] wrote:
On Wed, 25 Sept 2024 at 11:38, Chen-Yu Tsai [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi folks,

This series is split off from my "DT hardware prober" series [1].

Changes since v7:
- Added stub versions for of_regulator_get_optional() for !CONFIG_OF
  and !CONFIG_REGULATOR
- Added new patches for devres version and converting MTK pmdomain
  driver

At ELCE, Sebastian told me about his recent work on adding regulator
supply support to the Rockchip power domain driver [2], how the MediaTek
driver has been using the existing devm_regulator_get() API and
reassigning different device nodes to the device doing the lookup, and
how the new of_regulator_get_optional() is the proper fit for this.

Patch 1 adds a new of_regulator_get_optional() function to look up
regulator supplies using device tree nodes.

Patch 2 adds a devres version of the aforementioned function at
Sebastian's request for the two power domain drivers.

Patch 3 converts the MediaTek power domain driver to use function.


Each of the latter two patches depend on the previous one at build time.
Mark, would it be possible for you to put the two regulator patches
on an immutable branch / tag? Otherwise we could have Ulf ack the
pmdomain patch and merge it through your tree. Sebastian was fine
with converting the rockchip pmdomain some time later.
Thanks for providing some context!

In my opinion I would prefer an immutable branch/tag of the regulator
core changes, so I can carry the pmdomain changes for MTK through my
pmdomain tree, but also because I would prefer if Sebastian could make
the corresponding conversion for the Rockchip pmdomain driver. If this
can get queued soon, there is really no need to have an intermediate
step for Rockchip, I think.

Does it make sense - or do you prefer another way forward?
Makes sense to me!

ChenYu
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help