On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 08:22:18AM +0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> Hello Krzysztof,
>
> On Tue, 2020-08-25 at 09:50 +0200, krzk@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 09:45:00AM +0200, krzk@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 09:25:37AM +0200, krzk@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 06:51:33AM +0000, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:
> > > > > Hello Krzysztof,
> > > > >
> > > > > Just some questions - please ignore if I misunderstood the
> > > > > impact of
> > > > > the change.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 2020-08-24 at 21:06 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > > > Device tree schema expects regulator names to be
> > > > > > lowercase. This
> > > > > > fixes
> > > > > > dtbs_check warnings like:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mn-ddr4-evk.dt.yaml:
> > > > > > pmic@4b:
> > > > > > regulators:LDO1:regulator-name:0: 'LDO1' does not match
> > > > > > '^ldo[1-6]$'
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > .../boot/dts/freescale/imx8mn-ddr4-evk.dts | 22
> > > > > > +++++++++------
> > > > > > ----
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mn-ddr4-
> > > > > > evk.dts
> > > > > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mn-ddr4-evk.dts
> > > > > > index a1e5483dbbbe..299caed5d46e 100644
> > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mn-ddr4-evk.dts
> > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mn-ddr4-evk.dts
> > > > > > @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regulators {
> > > > > > buck1_reg: BUCK1 {
> > > > > > - regulator-name = "BUCK1";
> > > > > > + regulator-name = "buck1";
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not against this change but I would expect seeing some
> > > > > other
> > > > > patches too? I guess this will change the regulator name in
> > > > > regulator
> > > > > core, right? So maybe I am mistaken but it looks to me this
> > > > > change is
> > > > > visible in suppliers, sysfs and debugfs too? Thus changing this
> > > > > sounds
> > > > > a bit like asking for a nose bleed :) Am I right that the
> > > > > impact of
> > > > > this change has been thoroughly tested? Are there any other
> > > > > patches
> > > > > (that I have not seen) related to this change?
> > > >
> > > > Oh, crap, the names of regulators in the driver are lowercase,
> > > > but they
> > > > use of_match_ptr for upper case. Seriously, why making a binding
> > > > which
> > > > is contradictory to the driver implementation on the first day?
> > > >
> > > > The driver goes with binding, right? One expects uppercase, other
> > > > lowercase...
> > > >
> > > > And tell me, what is now the ABI? The binding or the incorrect
> > > > implementation?
> > >
> > > Wait, my mistake. I got confused by my own change. The node name
> > > stays
> > > the same, so of_match will be correct.
>
> Yes. I think so too. Match will still work as earler.
>
> > >
> > > The driver internally already uses lowercase names.
>
> Yep. I was simply thinking that if anyone has been specifying the
> regulators as suppliers by name - then this change will change things
> (as is seen for LDO5). Additionally, if any user-space SW has been
> reading the regulator states from sysfs - then these names will also
> change the sysfs. Debugfs change is hopefully not such a big deal.
About user-space, I think the embedded DT is not part of kernel ABI, so
there is no such requirement about keeping it stable. I agree though it
might be annoying surprise.
>
> Whether this really breaks anything is beyond my knowledge as I don't
> even have this board. Anyways, I think that by minimum the commit
> message should point out that this change will be visible outside DTS
> and the BD718x7 driver - up to the user-space.
Good point, I will extend the commit msg about possible impact and
fixing supplies.
>
> > >
> > > Everything looks good. I will just double check whether the
> > > constraints
> > > did not change on the board after boot.
> >
> > Constraints look good.
> >
> > > > > > regulator-min-microvolt =
> > > > > > <700000>;
> > > > > > regulator-max-microvolt =
> > > > > > <1300000>;
> > > > > > regulator-boot-on;
> > > > > > @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
> > > > > > };
> > > > > >
> > > > > > buck2_reg: BUCK2 {
> > > > > > - regulator-name = "BUCK2";
> > > > > > + regulator-name = "buck2";
> > > > > > regulator-min-microvolt =
> > > > > > <700000>;
> > > > > > regulator-max-microvolt =
> > > > > > <1300000>;
> > > > > > regulator-boot-on;
> > > > > > @@ -79,14 +79,14 @@
> > > > > >
> > > > > > buck3_reg: BUCK3 {
> > > > > > // BUCK5 in datasheet
> > > > > > - regulator-name = "BUCK3";
> > > > > > + regulator-name = "buck3";
> > > > > > regulator-min-microvolt =
> > > > > > <700000>;
> > > > > > regulator-max-microvolt =
> > > > > > <1350000>;
> > > > > > };
> > > > > >
> > > > > > buck4_reg: BUCK4 {
> > > > > > // BUCK6 in datasheet
> > > > > > - regulator-name = "BUCK4";
> > > > > > + regulator-name = "buck4";
> > > > > > regulator-min-microvolt =
> > > > > > <3000000>;
> > > > > > regulator-max-microvolt =
> > > > > > <3300000>;
> > > > > > regulator-boot-on;
> > > > > > @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@
> > > > > >
> > > > > > buck5_reg: BUCK5 {
> > > > > > // BUCK7 in datasheet
> > > > > > - regulator-name = "BUCK5";
> > > > > > + regulator-name = "buck5";
> > > > >
> > > > > What I see in bd718x7-regulator.c for LDO6 desc is:
> > > > >
> > > > > /* LDO6 is supplied by buck5 */
> > > > > .supply_name = "buck5",
> > > > >
> > > > > So, is this change going to change the supply-chain for the
> > > > > board? Is
> > > > > this intended? (Or am I mistaken on what is the impact of
> > > > > regulator-
> > > > > name property?)
> > >
> > > Good point, let me check the supplies.
> >
> > This patch actually fixes the supplies which before were not working
> > because of case mismatch.
> > Before:
> >
> > regulator use open bypass opmode voltage
> > current min max
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------------
> > regulator-dummy 4 5 0
> > unknown 0mV 0mA 0mV 0mV
> > LDO6 1 0 0
> > unknown 1200mV 0mA 900mV 1800mV
> > BUCK1 1 0 0
> > unknown 850mV 0mA 700mV 1300mV
> > BUCK2 2 1 0
> > unknown 1000mV 0mA 700mV 1300mV
> > cpu0-
> > cpu 1 0mA 1000m
> > V 1000mV
> > BUCK3 1 0 0
> > unknown 975mV 0mA 700mV 1350mV
> > BUCK4 1 0 0
> > unknown 3300mV 0mA 3000mV 3300mV
> > BUCK5 1 0 0
> > unknown 1800mV 0mA 1605mV 1995mV
> > BUCK6 1 0 0
> > unknown 1200mV 0mA 800mV 1400mV
> > LDO1 1 0 0
> > unknown 1800mV 0mA 1600mV 1900mV
> > LDO2 1 0 0
> > unknown 800mV 0mA 800mV 900mV
> > LDO3 1 0 0
> > unknown 1800mV 0mA 1800mV 3300mV
> > LDO4 1 0 0
> > unknown 900mV 0mA 900mV 1800mV
> > ldo5 1 4 0
> > unknown 1800mV 0mA 1800mV 1800mV
> >
> >
> >
> > After:
> > regulator use open bypass opmode voltage
> > current min max
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------------
> > buck1 1 0 0
> > unknown 850mV 0mA 700mV 1300mV
> > buck2 2 1 0
> > unknown 850mV 0mA 700mV 1300mV
> > cpu0-
> > cpu 1 0mA 850m
> > V 850mV
> > buck3 1 0 0
> > unknown 975mV 0mA 700mV 1350mV
> > buck4 1 0 0
> > unknown 3300mV 0mA 3000mV 3300mV
> > buck5 2 1 0
> > unknown 1800mV 0mA 1605mV 1995mV
> > ldo6 1 0 0
>
> That was my point :) Before this commit the system has acted
> differently - either by accident or by purpose. In any case, the DTS
> change will change supply logic and this should probably be mentioned
> in commit log to help bisecting possible issues :)
>
> But as I said, I am not opposed to this change - I am merely somewhat
> cautious with changes like this.
Thanks for the hints.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
