lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH] ARM: dts: add dtsi for palmas
Date
Hi Benoit,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cousson, Benoit
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 3:00 PM
> To: J, KEERTHY
> Cc: Stephen Warren; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-
> omap@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> ldewangan@nvidia.com; grant.likely@secretlab.ca; swarren@nvidia.com;
> sameo@linux.intel.com; gg@slimlogic.co.uk; lee.jones@linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: add dtsi for palmas
>
> Hi Keerthy,
>
> On 06/10/2013 06:03 AM, J, KEERTHY wrote:
> > Hi Stephen,
> >
> > Thanks for the review comments.
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Stephen Warren [swarren@wwwdotorg.org]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 1:26 AM
> > To: J, KEERTHY
> > Cc: Cousson, Benoit; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org;
> > linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> > ldewangan@nvidia.com; grant.likely@secretlab.ca; swarren@nvidia.com;
> > sameo@linux.intel.com; gg@slimlogic.co.uk; lee.jones@linaro.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: add dtsi for palmas
> >
> > On 06/07/2013 05:28 AM, J Keerthy wrote:
> >> Adds palmas mfd and palmas regulator nodes. This is based on the
> >> patch series:
> >>
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg89957.html
> >>
> >> The device tree nodes are based on:
> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/6/25
> >
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/palmas.dtsi
> >> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/palmas.dtsi
> >
> >> +&palmas {
> >
> > Hmmm. That (i.e. requiring the board file to declare the node, then
> > setting up all the content by later including this file) is an
> > interesting approach. I guess it's reasonable. The one issue is that
> > it makes it a little harder for the board file to override any of the
> > properties in this file., although it certainly is possible by
> > including those overrides after the include.
> >
> > Irrespective of that, some comments on this:
> >
> >> + palmas_pmic {
> >
> >> + ti,ldo6-vibrator;
> >
> > For example, what if the board doesn't want to have the property set?
> >
> >> +
> >> + regulators {
> >> + smps123_reg: smps123 {
> >> + regulator-name = "smps123";
> >> + regulator-min-microvolt = < 600000>;
> >> + regulator-max-microvolt = <1500000>;
> >
> > Or what if the board wants to limit the voltage range of this
> > regulator due to what it's used for on the board.
> >
> >> + regulator-always-on;
> >> + regulator-boot-on;
> >
> > And those two properties are almost certainly board-specific policy.
> >
> > Totally agree to all the above concerns. So can we have a custom
> .dtsi
> > file for a board+pmic combination? Or have only the required
> > properties over ridden in the board file?
>
> Yes, you can do that potentially if most OMAP5 boards will reuse the
> same kind of settings. Kevin has just done that for OMAP3 + twl4030.
>
> In this case, since we do have only one board, I'm not sure it worth
> the effort.

I sent a V2 with only the most generic property in palmas.dtsi and the
Configurable parameter under the board file. Let me know if that patch set
Is fine.


>
> Regards,
> Benoit

Regards,
Keerthy


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-06-10 13:01    [W:0.058 / U:0.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site