Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 29 May 2020 12:10:31 +0100 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] regulator: do not balance regulators without constraints |
| |
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 07:45:06AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > On 28.05.2020 15:43, Mark Brown wrote:
> > This forces every supply to have something which explicitly manages > > voltages which means that if one of the coupled supplies doesn't really > > care about the voltage (perhaps doesn't even have any explicit > > consumers) and just needs to be within a certain range of another supply > > then it'll end up restricting things needlessly.
> Frankly, that's exactly what we need for Exynos5422 case. If devfreq > driver is not enabled/compiled, we want to keep the "vdd_int" volatage > unchanged. This confirms me that we really need to have a custom coupler > for Exynos5422 case. It will solve such issues without adding hacks to > regulator core.
It sounds like you need that or some form of cooperation between the devfreq and cpufreq drivers.
> > Saravana was trying to do some stuff with sync_state() which might be > > interesting here although I have concerns with that approach too:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200527074057.246606-1-saravanak@google.com/
> This still doesn't solve the above mentioned case.
I didn't mean the particular patch, I meant something using the sync_state() callback. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |