Hi, On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 4:20 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 12:31:41PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > > If you're copying someone into a thread that's not obviously relevant > for them it's good practice to put a note about it at the top of the > mail to reduce the chances that it just gets deleted unread - people get > copies of all sorts of random stuff for not great reasons (like getting > pulled in by checkpatch due to once having done a cleanup) and are often > quicky to delete things. > > > This series breaks USB and PCIe for some SC8280XP and SA540P machines > > where the DP PHY regulators are shared with other PHYs whose drivers do > > not request a load. > > > Specifically, the hard-coded vdda-phy load of 21.8 mA added by this > > series, causes several RPMh regulators to now be put in low-power mode. > > > I found Doug's suggestion to handle situations like this in regulator > > core: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180814170617.100087-1-dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > but since that was rejected, how do we deal with this generally? > > > In the above thread Doug mentioned adding support for load requests to > > further drivers and Bjorn mentioned working around it by adding > > regulator-system-load properties to DT. > > > It seems quite likely that changes like this one affects other systems > > too, and the effects may be hard to debug. So a more general solution > > than playing whack-a-mole using DT would be good to have. > > You could add a way to specify constant base loads in DT on either a per > regulator or per consumer basis. Yes, this please! ...on a per consumer basis. :-) It's been on my wishlist for a while and would eliminate a massive amount of code / tables in the drivers. We could debate syntax, but I guess you'd either do it w/ two cells vdda-phy-supply = <&vdda_mipi_dsi0_1p2 21800>; ...or with matching properties: vdda-phy-supply = <&vdda_mipi_dsi0_1p2>; vdda-phy-supply-base-load = <21800>; -Doug
