On 28/08/2023 06:51, hui liu wrote:
On 8/25/2023 6:11 PM, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 25/08/2023 11:03, hui liu wrote:
Hi Heikki,
I will let Bryan to comment, I am using the driver to support the
pdphy in SMB2352 and there is no external regulator required, so I am
just using a dummy regulator device and I saw this unbalanced
regulator disabling warnings, so my intention for this change is just
fixing the warning message. However, I am fine with whatever
suggestion you have, since the logic is straightforward, and I can
make the changes once you have the agreement.
Thanks,
Hui
Err well on real hardware with a real regulator I don't see this error.
Just a doublt, if real regulator has no this error, who enabled it
before it was reseted?
adb/xbl most likely i.e. the bootloader
If you think about it, be it on an embedded dev board or on a phone,
enabling the type-c port -> regulator that goes with it, would be common
practice, especially if you boot the board, as I do via USB to begin with.
I'd say we should try the second proposed changed in pdphy_start
pdphy_stop since it looks neater.
I updated the code refer to the proposal, and it worked well,but I just
thought it makes code a little redundant. Why don't we only keep one
pdphy_enable/pdphy_disable or pdphy_start/pdphy_stop?
Not sure I follow you there.
We should have only one regulator enable/disable in pdphy_start and
pdphy_stop per my understanding.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/9574a219-3abf-b2c9-7d90-e79d364134bb@xxxxxxxxxx/
---
bod
