linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Regulator probe
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 13:17:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160909121749.GR27946@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1473258241.11323.83.camel@linux.intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1012 bytes --]

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 05:24:01PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 11:24 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Nothing says you have to describe all regulators, you just need to
> > tell the core you have told it about everything you're going to tell
> > it about.  Until you do that the core has to assume that something may
> > come along later and describe that supply.

> That's I would like to make work. For now we have fixed voltage
> regulator which returns EPROBE_DEFER since GPIO IP is not initialized
> yet at that point. But regulator framework decides that it's not
> possible case and overrides the error code.

What do you mean?  Of course we should handle probe deferral if we fail
to get a resource like a GPIO.  Are you trying to say that this doesn't
work for you?

> For me it still looks that regulator framework would not intercept
> deferred regulators in case of full constraints. Feels like I'm missing
> something...

I can't parse the above, sorry.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-09 12:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-01 14:53 Regulator probe Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-01 15:38 ` Mark Brown
2016-09-01 16:15   ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-01 17:02     ` Mark Brown
2016-09-05 16:01       ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-06 10:24         ` Mark Brown
2016-09-07 14:24           ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 12:17             ` Mark Brown [this message]
2016-09-09 12:55               ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 15:29                 ` Mark Brown
2016-09-09 16:10                   ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 16:38                     ` Mark Brown
2016-09-09 17:04                       ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 17:18                         ` Mark Brown
2016-09-10 11:03                       ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-12 15:27                         ` Mark Brown
2016-09-12 16:01                           ` Andy Shevchenko

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=20160909121749.GR27946@sirena.org.uk \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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 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).