Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences

On Thursday 13 September 2012 15:03:27 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

* PGP Signed by an unknown key

On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 09:00 +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 09:54:09AM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 15:36 +0900, Alex Courbot wrote:

quoted

On Thursday 13 September 2012 14:22:57 Tomi Valkeinen wrote:

 
 

quoted

However, I fear these board specific things may be quite a bit
anything,
so it may well be pwm, gpios and regulators are not enough for them.
For
example, there could be an FPGA on the board which requires some
configuration to accomplish the task at hand. It could be rather
difficult to handle it with a generic power sequence.

Right. Note that this framework is supposed to be extended - I would
like to 

 at least add regulator voltage setting, and maybe even

quoted

quoted

quoted

support for clocks and pinmux (but that might be out of place).

Yes, that's one concern of mine... I already can imagine someone
suggesting adding conditionals to the power sequence data. Perhaps also
direct memory read/writes so you can twiddle registers directly. And so
on. Where's the limit what it should contain? Can we soon write full
drivers with the DT data? =)

I have this concern aswell, that's why I'm sceptical about this patch
set. But what are the alternatives? Adding power code to the drivers and
thus adding board specific code to them is backwards.

As was pointed out in earlier posts in this thread, these are almost
always device specific, not board specific.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that in practice, people just wrote 
their hooks into the board files instead of writing more "specialized" drivers 
(which I agree would have been the correct way of doing). That is why hooks 
like those of the pwm_backlight driver were "board specific code" to me too.

Alex.