lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v16 2/2] i2c: core: support bus regulator controlling in adapter
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 9:34 PM Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 1:17 AM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 12:36:07PM +0800, Hsin-Yi Wang wrote:
> >
> > > + adap->bus_regulator = devm_regulator_get(&adap->dev, "bus");
> > > + if (IS_ERR(adap->bus_regulator)) {
> > > + res = PTR_ERR(adap->bus_regulator);
> > > + goto out_reg;
> > > + }
> >
> > Idiomatically supplies should be named as they are by the chip datasheet
> > rather than just a generic name like this, and I'm guessing that systems
> > that have supplies like this will often already have something
> > requesting the supply (eg, it's quite common for consumer drivers to do
> > this) under that name. I can see this being a useful thing to factor
> > out into the core but it seems like it'd be better to have it enabled by
> > having the controllers (or devices) pass a supply name (or possibly
> > requested regulator) to the core rather than by just hard coding a name
> > in the core so bindings look as expected.
> >
>
> I'll move the regulator request into device instead of core in the
> next version. Thanks.
>
Hi Mark,

v17 is sent here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mediatek/cover/20210309133131.1585838-1-hsinyi@chromium.org/

Thanks.

> > I do also wonder if it's better to put the feature on the clients rather
> > than the controller, I don't think it makes much difference though.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-07 09:31    [W:0.066 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site