On July 8, 2014 2:23:55 PM GMT+01:00, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 05:13:56PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> On 07/07/14 15:36, Mark Brown wrote: > >> >With regulators the delays are handled transparently in the >framework - >> >by the time the functions return the operation should have >commpleted. >> >If there is a need to have a non-blocking interface we'll have to >add >> >this. The delays can be queried with _time() functions. > >> We are looking at a somewhat tangential question here... > >I don't think so... > >> Hence rather than picking a given power state (deep sleep or similar) >> we want the control to be on capture latency. Hence userspace >> can specify the 'worst case' latency it will accept and the >> device will hence enter the lowest power state, between samples, >> that it can without failing to meet the requirement. >> >> What I was wondering is whether there is anything similar >> elsewhere that you know of? For example, could we query a >> regulator driver to ask it how long it will take to start up >> a given output? > >...hence my comment that "The delays can be queried with _time() >functions - you don't need to implement the delays but you can find out >what they will be. Ah sounds like I miss interpreted your response! Will look into the _time stuff. -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
