Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] DONOTMERGE: arm64: dts: ti: Add TI TPS65219 PMIC support for AM642 SK board.

From: jerome Neanne <jneanne@baylibre.com>
To: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Wadim Egorov <W.Egorov@phytec.de>,
	"lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	"kristo@kernel.org" <kristo@kernel.org>,
	"dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org" 
	<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>,
	"lee@kernel.org" <lee@kernel.org>,
	"tony@atomide.com" <tony@atomide.com>,
	"shawnguo@kernel.org" <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	"geert+renesas@glider.be" <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	"dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org" <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>,
	"marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com" <marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com>,
	"vkoul@kernel.org" <vkoul@kernel.org>,
	"biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com" <biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com>,
	"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"jeff@labundy.com" <jeff@labundy.com>, "afd@ti.com" <afd@ti.com>,
	"khilman@baylibre.com" <khilman@baylibre.com>,
	"narmstrong@baylibre.com" <narmstrong@baylibre.com>,
	"msp@baylibre.com" <msp@baylibre.com>,
	"j-keerthy@ti.com" <j-keerthy@ti.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-input@vger.kernel.org" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] DONOTMERGE: arm64: dts: ti: Add TI TPS65219 PMIC support for AM642 SK board.
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 08:28:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c2014039-f1e8-6976-33d6-52e2dd4e7b66@baylibre.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b6ea8cb7-38c4-13cf-a08a-ece973859342@ti.com>

On 16/12/2022 07:21, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
> 
> 
> On 16/12/22 03:11, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>> On 18:22-20221215, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 11:54:11AM -0600, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>>>> On 16:09-20221215, Mark Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That proposal looks really non-idiomatic and quite unusual, if there's a
>>>>> fixed voltage supply to the LDO I'd expect to see it modeled as a fixed
>>>>> voltage regulator.  I'm not sure what the use of bypass here is trying
>>>>> to accomplish TBH.
>>>
>>>> The problem is this - the default NVM in the PMIC is setup such that
>>>> VSET value =3.3v and bypass bit set (makes sense since the vin=3.3v).
>>>
>>> This implies no voltage drop over the LDO?  Sounds a bit suspect.
>>
>> Not the choice I'd probably have made ;)
>>
>>>
>>>> Now the constraint is bypass bit cannot be changed without the LDO
>>>> being switched off.
>>>
> 
> Per https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tps65219.pdf (7.3.6 Linear
> Regulators).
> 
> LDOs have two modes:
> 
> 1. Load switch mode: in this case, output voltages of 1.5V up to 5.5V
> are supported.
> 
> 2 Linear regulator LDO mode where output voltage is programmable in the
> range of 0.6V to 3.4V in 50mV-steps with possibility of bypass.
> 
> (CAUTION on page 25):
> A mode change between LDO(/bypass) and LSW-mode must only be performed,
> when this regulator is disabled!
> A change between LDO and bypass-mode (supported by LDO1 and LDO2 only)
> is supported during operation.
> 
> So, seems like bypass can be toggled even with LDO on?
>I possibly miss-interpreted this caution statement which leads to that 
situation.

Your understanding sounds correct. My mistake... Sorry for that

Regards,
Jerome.