lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: hwmon: tda38640: Add interrupt & regulator properties
From
On 2/14/24 11:55, Conor Dooley wrote:
[ ... ]
>>> Why "vout0" if there's only one output? Is it called that in the
>>> documentation? I had a quick check but only saw it called "vout".
>>> Are there other related devices that would have multiple regulators
>>> that might end up sharing the binding?
>>>
>>
>> Primarily because that is what the PMBus core generates for the driver
>> because no one including me was aware that this is unacceptable
>> for single-output drivers.
>
> Is it unacceptable? If you're implying that I am saying it is, that's
> not what I was doing here - I'm just wondering why it was chosen.
> Numbering when there's only one seems odd, so I was just looking for the
> rationale.
>

Given the tendency of corporate speak (aka "this was a good attempt" for
a complete screwup), and since this did come up before, I did interpret
it along that line. My apologies if that was not the idea.

Still, I really don't know how to resolve this for existing PMBus drivers
which do register "vout0" even if there is only a single output regulator.

Guenter


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 15:04    [W:1.514 / U:0.588 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site