From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Philippe Schenker <philippe.schenker@toradex.com>
Cc: "lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Regulator: Core: Add clock-enable to fixed-regulator
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 19:26:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190806182606.GG4527@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af076ff7e1df4c07ab659ff83efa0c85d5e5e3d6.camel@toradex.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1580 bytes --]
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 12:57:32PM +0000, Philippe Schenker wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-08-05 at 17:37 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > So the capacitor on the input of the p-FET is keeping the switch on?
> > When I say it's not switching with the clock I mean it's not constantly
> > bouncing on and off at whatever rate the clock is going at.
> Ah, that's what you mean. Yes, the capacitor gets slowly charged with
> the
> resistor but nearly instantly discharged with the n-FET. So this
> capacitor
> is used as a Low-Pass filter to get the p-FET to be constantly switched.
> It is not bouncing on and off with the clock but rather it is switched
> constantly.
Good, I guess this might be part of why it's got this poor ramp time.
> > I think you are going to end up with a hack no matter what.
> That's exactly what I'm trying to prevent. To introduce a fixed
> regulator that can have a clock is not a hack for me.
> That the hardware solution is a hack is debatable yes, but why should I
> not try to solve it properly in software?
A lot of this discussion is around the definition of terms like "hack"
and "proper".
> In the end I just want to represent our hardware in software. Would you
> agree to create a new clock-regulator.c driver?
> Or would it make more sense to extend fixed.c to support clocks-enable
> without touching core?
At least a separate compatible makes sense, I'd have to see the code to
be clear if a completely separate driver makes sense but it'll need
separate ops at least. There'd definitely be a lot of overlap though so
it's worth looking at.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-06 18:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-30 17:30 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Hello Philippe Schenker
2019-07-30 17:30 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] Regulator: Core: Add clock-enable to fixed-regulator Philippe Schenker
2019-07-30 18:10 ` Mark Brown
2019-07-30 21:00 ` Philippe Schenker
2019-07-31 21:23 ` Mark Brown
2019-08-05 11:07 ` Philippe Schenker
2019-08-05 16:37 ` Mark Brown
2019-08-06 12:57 ` Philippe Schenker
2019-08-06 18:26 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2019-08-07 6:46 ` Philippe Schenker
2019-07-30 17:30 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] ARM: dts: imx6ull: Add phy-supply to fec Philippe Schenker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190806182606.GG4527@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=philippe.schenker@toradex.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).