On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:41:42PM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote: > Mark Brown writes: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 03:52:54PM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote:
> > This doesn't feel like a regulator API problem exactly, a lot of what > > you're talking about here seems like you really need the devices to > > coopereate with each other and know what they're doing in order to work > > well together. > I was hoping, that I somehow could get the necessary coordination from > the regulator framework. If the best I can get ATM is notifications, then > I'll try it and see what kind of code falls out of this. > It still seems a bit of a limitation to me, that the only way to really > switch off a regulator is with regulator_force_disable(), which is quite > a hard hammer. I really have no idea what sort of communication you're envisaging here - powering supplies down when other devices are trying to use them is a really serious thing with very substantial consequences for userspace, if the devices aren't cooperating at a level higher than the regulator API level it's unlikely to go well. > This only works as long as every consumer of the supply is cooperating > (which is my personal use case but doesn't look very future proof). I guess > there has to be some pain for using quirky, unreliable HW... ;) That's going to be the case no matter what I think.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
