On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 at 17:36, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 05:27:12PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 at 17:17, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 05:12:35PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: > > > > > I understand from a pure regulators' correctness point of view, > > > > ENABLE_CTL should be the one checked there, so I can change the patch > > > > as you suggested, but there seems to be some performance penalty > > > > there. > > > > I thought the goal was to have the performance penalty to ensure that > > > the regulator had actually started? > > > IMHO, with the poll_enabled_time mechanism added, we would not need to > > wait for the full enabled_time time for the regulator to get enabled, > > but we could poll (and potentially know earlier) if the regulator is > > enabled. > > The performance penalty I was talking, is about how should we check if > > the regulator is really enabled or not - via reading the STATUS1 > > register, which seems to tell the status a bit faster, or via reading > > the ENABLE_CTL register which we also use to enable/disable the > > regulator, but which seems to be slower in updating the status. > > That seems... interesting. Are you sure the regulator has fully ramped > when STATUS1 starts flagging? On a consumer device, I am not sure I have any way of checking that, but if there's some way you'd like me to validate it, I'll be happy to. > > > > > > > The WARN_ON? This was suggested by Bjorn to catch the case where the > > > > > > DT binding for a PMIC instantiates only one of the regulators. > > > > > > No, this whole loop - why this whole match and get child stuff? > > > > > This loop mechanism is what I saw in the other qcom regulators > > > > upstream, so thought it was an acceptable way. > > > > For the two children nodes, do you recommend another mechanism to get > > > > and validate both nodes? > > > > I don't understand what you mean by "two children nodes" here? > > > The two 'lab' and 'ibb' regulator nodes that are part of the labibb node. > > Use of_match and regulators_node like other regulator drivers. Ok, let me see what I can do with those; we still need to flag if some platform only instantiates one of the two lab/ibb regulators - I was given the impression they're 'both or none' case. Best, Sumit.
