All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>
To: "broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: "agross@kernel.org" <agross@kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-power <linux-power@fi.rohmeurope.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org" 
	<linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
	"lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 4/7] regulator: add property parsing and callbacks to set protection limits
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2021 15:47:23 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <33b652378ea04d522eb027080ed54883f0ed3d17.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210402171832.GC5402@sirena.org.uk>

Hi Mark,

Thanks for the review(s)!
On Fri, 2021-04-02 at 18:18 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 12:23:02PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Existing logic does not warn if over_current_protection is
> > given as
> > +	 * a constraint but driver does not support that. I think we
> > should
> > +	 * warn about this type of issues as it is possible someone
> > changes
> 
> The "existing logic" bit here is for a changelog, not the code - as
> soon
> as the patch is applied the comment becomes inaccurate.  This also
> seems
> like a separate patch.

I don't think this patch changed the logic but kept it as it is now.
Eg, for the existing over_current_protection property we still silently
ignore case where property is given but driver does not support setting
it. For me this sounds like fragile approach and I did handle the new
properties (like detection) in a different way. Thus the comment should
stay valid - and thus I didn't think this warrants a new patch.

If you think we should change the logic, then we should definitely do
that in separate patch. That allows revert if existing setups break
everywhere. How would you like this to be? I can change the logic if
you see it's worth the risk of breaking existing setups.

Best Regards
	Matti Vaittinen

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-04 15:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-11 10:21 [RFC PATCH v3 0/7] Extend regulator notification support Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-11 10:21 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/7] dt_bindings: Add protection limit properties Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-24 15:08   ` Rob Herring
2021-03-11 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/7] regulator: add warning flags Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-11 10:22 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/7] regulator: IRQ based event/error notification helpers Matti Vaittinen
2021-04-02 17:11   ` Mark Brown
2021-04-04 16:07     ` Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-11 10:23 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/7] regulator: add property parsing and callbacks to set protection limits Matti Vaittinen
2021-04-02 17:18   ` Mark Brown
2021-04-04 15:47     ` Vaittinen, Matti [this message]
2021-03-11 10:23 ` [RFC PATCH v3 5/7] dt-bindings: regulator: bd9576 add FET ON-resistance for OCW Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-11 16:41   ` Rob Herring
2021-03-11 10:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 6/7] regulator: bd9576: Support error reporting Matti Vaittinen
2021-03-11 10:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 7/7] regulator: bd9576: Fix the driver name in id table Matti Vaittinen
2021-04-02 17:19   ` Mark Brown
2021-04-04 15:51     ` Vaittinen, Matti
2021-04-02 17:19 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/7] Extend regulator notification support Mark Brown

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=33b652378ea04d522eb027080ed54883f0ed3d17.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com \
    --to=matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com \
    --cc=agross@kernel.org \
    --cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-power@fi.rohmeurope.com \
    --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.