Re: [PATCH v16 2/2] i2c: core: support bus regulator controlling in adapter

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 9:34 PM Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 1:17 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 12:36:07PM +0800, Hsin-Yi Wang wrote:
> >
> > > +     adap->bus_regulator = devm_regulator_get(&adap->dev, "bus");
> > > +     if (IS_ERR(adap->bus_regulator)) {
> > > +             res = PTR_ERR(adap->bus_regulator);
> > > +             goto out_reg;
> > > +     }
> >
> > Idiomatically supplies should be named as they are by the chip datasheet
> > rather than just a generic name like this, and I'm guessing that systems
> > that have supplies like this will often already have something
> > requesting the supply (eg, it's quite common for consumer drivers to do
> > this) under that name.  I can see this being a useful thing to factor
> > out into the core but it seems like it'd be better to have it enabled by
> > having the controllers (or devices) pass a supply name (or possibly
> > requested regulator) to the core rather than by just hard coding a name
> > in the core so bindings look as expected.
> >
>
> I'll move the regulator request into device instead of core in the
> next version. Thanks.
>
Hi Mark,

v17 is sent here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mediatek/cover/20210309133131.1585838-1-hsinyi@xxxxxxxxxxxx/

Thanks.

> > I do also wonder if it's better to put the feature on the clients rather
> > than the controller, I don't think it makes much difference though.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Hardward Monitoring]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux