On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 12:32:34PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 19:26, Dmitry Baryshkov > <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 10:02:31AM GMT, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 02:44:08PM +0530, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 02:15:12PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > > > On 10.07.2024 8:10 AM, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote: > > > > > > From: Praveenkumar I <quic_ipkumar@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > Add the APC power domain definitions used in IPQ9574. > > > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Praveenkumar I <quic_ipkumar@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan <quic_varada@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Could you please confirm [1]? > > > > > > > > > > Konrad > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/57dadb35-5dde-4127-87aa-962613730336@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > > > > The author is off for a few days. Will get back to you once he is in. > > > > > > Have responded to that query. Please see https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/ZqCCpf1FwLWulSgr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > If it responds to voltage values, please model it as a regulator rather > > than a power domain. > > Just wanted to give my brief opinion around this too. > > I agree that it seems to make sense to model it as a regulator, but > that doesn't necessarily mean that we shouldn't model it as a > power-domain too. > > If it is a power-domain it should be modelled like that - and then the > power-domain provider should be assigned as the consumer of that > regulator. Have posted V7 (without modelling as power-domain). Please review. Thanks Varada
