> -----Original Message----- > From: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2021 5:49 PM > To: Richard Zhu <hongxing.zhu@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Mark Brown > <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>; l.stach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; > lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx; > linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] PCI: imx6: Fix the regulator dump when link > never came up > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 09:18:39AM +0000, Richard Zhu wrote: > > > Isn't this something that depend on the actual board design? From > > > the driver point of view you should not silently enforce such design > > > requirement on the board. > > > Am I missing something here? Would be glad to you if you can clarify > in case. > > > > > [Richard Zhu] Yes, it is relied on the actual HW board design. > > This regulator is one optional, not mandatory required for all the board > designs. > > So, there is one _enabled or not check before manipulate this regulator. > I think I was not clear in my question. > > I'm asking what's is going to happen if the vpci-e supply is used in the > actual board design AND the same regulator is shared with another > device (to my understanding this should be just fine from the regulator API > point of view, correct me if I'm wrong). [Richard Zhu] Yes, agree with you. It should be fine from the regulator API point of view. BR Richard > > I'm not talking about board designed by NXP in which such use case might > not exist. > > Francesco
