From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753468AbaAZVul (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jan 2014 16:50:41 -0500 Received: from mail.active-venture.com ([67.228.131.205]:54267 "EHLO mail.active-venture.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753248AbaAZVuj (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jan 2014 16:50:39 -0500 X-Originating-IP: 108.223.40.66 Message-ID: <52E58330.90602@roeck-us.net> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:50:40 -0800 From: Guenter Roeck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jean Delvare CC: LM Sensors , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown , Liam Girdwood , Wei Ni Subject: Re: lm90 driver no longer working on PCs in 3.13 References: <52E561D0.4040308@roeck-us.net> <20140126211357.6fa68909@endymion.delvare> <52E573B6.9040903@roeck-us.net> <20140126214936.7736f530@endymion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20140126214936.7736f530@endymion.delvare> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/26/2014 12:49 PM, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 12:44:38 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On 01/26/2014 12:13 PM, Jean Delvare wrote: >> The regulator code changed with 3.13; the dummy regulator no longer exists, >> and the functionality it provided is supposed to be handled automatically. >> But that only really works on devicetree based systems and otherwise returns >> -EPROBE_DEFER as mentioned above. >> >> Maybe there is some configuration option, or maybe something needs to be >> configured from user space. I found neither. > > Neither would be acceptable to my eyes anyway. Things worked out of the > box before, they should keep working out of the box. > >> In the first case, we should create >> a dependency for the LM90 driver; in the latter case, we would have to make sure >> that it is well documented (I'd grumble on that, though - it would result in >> never ending trouble for us, having to repeatedly explain how this is now >> supposed to work). >> >> Another possible fix would be to have the regulator core return -ENODEV >> instead of -EPROBE_DEFER on non-dt systems. No idea if this would be acceptable >> or even feasible. > > Well, either the regulator subsystem gets fixed (or provides a suitable > API for drivers like lm90 and we update the lm90 driver to use it), or > I'll just revert the problematic commit for now. This is a severe > regression, we just can't leave things that way. > Maybe your configuration has CONFIG_REGULATORS disabled. Ubuntu has it enabled. I don't know about others. I agree, we may have to revert the patch. I don't think the regulator API works well enough in non-dt systems to be able to use it in such systems. Mark's expectation that regulator support must be disabled if regulators are not fully declared in non-dt systems doesn't seem very useful nor really feasible. Guenter