On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:01:55PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 04:32:13PM +0200, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 02:18:46PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > You're going to have to provide a much better explanation of what this > > > is doing - right now it seems like an abuse of constraints. Client > > > drivers can already determine if a particular voltage they want to set > > > is available via regulator_list_voltage() and so on, that's what > > > constraints are there to set. It sounds like you're trying to use them > > > for something else but you're really not explaining your use case > > > clearly. > > > There is no way to query what voltage I will actually get for a given input > > I looked at patch 2. It looked like an abuse of what constraints do, > and had zero explanation of why it was doing what it was doing. In any > case we need the regulator code and changelog to be clear about what the > interface is for and why it should be used, that's not happening here. > > > voltage. If you read drivers/clk/tegra/cvb. (you did do that right?), you > > will see that there is a minimum and maximum voltage defined by > > charaterization which needs to be capped to the regulator generated voltages > > for those points. > > I can't really tell what you're saying here. If the driver needs to > know if it can set the a given voltage there's already an API for doing > that as I said. If you're trying to convey this minimum and maximum > voltage via the constraints that sounds like an abuse of the constraints. No, what I want is the voltage which the regulator will output for a given regulator_set_voltage request taking constraints, regulator step etc into account. Peter. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
