Re: [RFC v4 01/14] regulator: of: Add helper for getting all supplies
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-09 11:42:13
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-devicetree, linux-mmc, linux-pm, linux-samsung-soc, lkml
On 06/09/2016 12:29 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 11:44:18AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:quoted
Few drivers have a need of getting regulator supplies without knowing their names: 1. The Simple Framebuffer driver works on setup provided by bootloader (outside of scope of kernel); 2. Generic power sequence driver may be attached to any device node. Add a Device Tree helper for parsing "-supply" properties and returning allocated bulk regulator consumers.I'm still very concerned that this is just an invitation to people to write half baked regulator consumers and half baked DTs to go along with it, making it a standard API that doesn't have big red flags on it that will flag up when "normal" drivers use it is not good. Right now this just looks like a standard API and people are going to just start using it. If we are going to do this perhaps we need a separate header or something to help flag this up.
No problem, I can move it to a special header. Actually, if you dislike this as an API, it does not have to be in header at all. I can just duplicate the simplefb code.
In the case of power sequences I'd expect the sequences to perform operations on named supplies - the core shouldn't know what the supplies are but the thing specifying the sequence should.
Hm, so maybe passing names like:
usb3503@08 {
reset-gpios = <&gpx3 5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
initial-mode = <1>;
vdd-supply = <&buck8_reg>;
foo-supply = <&buck9_reg>;
power-sequence;
power-sequence-supplies = "vdd", "foo";
};
but this is getting against initial idea of not adding any
power-sequence properties.
quoted
drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/regulator/of_regulator.h | 13 +++++ 2 files changed, 99 insertions(+)The external interface shouldn't be DT specific, the Intel people are busy importing all of DT into ACPI so they'll doubtless want an ACPI version.
Sure, I'll add it if this approach is acceptable. At this moment this is not necessary to show my idea so I prefer to avoid doing work which might be discarded very fast by review. Thanks for feedback! Best regards, Krzysztof