[lkml]   [2015]   [Jun]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RESEND 1/2] usb: ehci-exynos: Make provision for vdd regulators

On Monday, June 08, 2015 10:44 AM, "Krzysztof Kozlowski"
<> wrote:

my apologies for being late in replying to this thread.

> 2015-06-08 13:21 GMT+09:00 Anand Moon <>:
>> Hi Krzysztof ,
>> On 8 June 2015 at 07:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski <>
>> wrote:
>>> On 07.06.2015 22:20, Anand Moon wrote:
>>>> Facilitate getting required 3.3V and 1.0V VDD supply for
>>>> EHCI controller on Exynos.
>>>> With the patches for regulators' nodes merged in 3.15:
>>>> c8c253f ARM: dts: Add regulator entries to smdk5420
>>>> 275dcd2 ARM: dts: add max77686 pmic node for smdk5250,
>>>> the exynos systems turn on only minimal number of regulators.
>>>> Until now, the VDD regulator supplies were either turned on
>>>> by the bootloader, or the regulators were enabled by default
>>>> in the kernel, so that the controller drivers did not need to
>>>> care about turning on these regulators on their own.
>>>> This was rather bad about these controller drivers.
>>>> So ensuring now that the controller driver requests the necessary
>>>> VDD regulators (if available, unless there are direct VDD rails),
>>>> and enable them so as to make them working.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <>
>>>> Cc: Jingoo Han <>
>>>> Cc: Alan Stern <>
>>>> ---
>>>> Initial version of this patch was part of following series, though
>>>> they are not dependent on each other, resubmitting after rebasing.
>>> So you just took Vivek's patch along with all the credits... That is not
>>> how we usually do this.
>>> I would expect that rebasing a patch won't change the author unless this
>>> is fine with Vivek.
>> Sorry If I have done some mistake on my part.
>> I just looked at below mail chain. Before I send it.
> I don't get it. The patch you are referring to has a proper "From"
> field. So please use it as an example.
>> I don't want to take any credit out of it. I just re-base on the new
>> kernel.
Perhaps, you would have maintained the authorship !

>> I could not test this patch as it meant for exynos5440 boards.
> Are you sure? I think the driver is used on almost all of Exynos SoCs
> (Exynos4, Exynos5250, Exynos542x).

That's correct, as pointed by Krzysztof Kozlowski, the driver is same for
Exynos4 and Exynos5 series
of SoCs.

> Untested code should not go to the kernel. Additionally you should
> mark it as not-tested. Marking such patch as non-tested could help you
> finding some independent tests (tests performed by someone else).
> To summarize my point of view:
> 1. Unless Vivek's says otherwise, please give him the credits with
> proper "from" field.
> 2. Issues mentioned in previous mail should be addressed (missing
> IS_ERR(), how disabling the regulator during suspend affects waking
> up).
> 3. The patchset must be tested, even after rebasing.

Unfortunately, I got busy with a different project and lost track of the
patches posted upstream.
If it's not too late I can post a rebased version of the patch with previous
review comments addressed.

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-06-08 11:41    [W:0.049 / U:2.432 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site