On 21/01/2020 04:37, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:16 PM Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 03:15:59PM +0800, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
- I couldn't find a way to detect the number of regulators in the
device tree, if we wanted to refuse to probe the device if
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:16 PM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 03:15:59PM +0800, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
>
> > - I couldn't find a way to detect the number of regulators in the
> >device tree, if we wanted to refuse to probe the device if there
> >are too many regulators,
On 20/01/2020 17:03, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 02:43:10PM +, Steven Price wrote:
>
>> From discussions offline, I think I've come round to the view that
>> having a "soft PDC" in device tree isn't the right solution. Device tree
>> should be describing the hardware and that
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 02:43:10PM +, Steven Price wrote:
> From discussions offline, I think I've come round to the view that
> having a "soft PDC" in device tree isn't the right solution. Device tree
> should be describing the hardware and that isn't actually a hardware
> component.
You
On 14/01/2020 07:15, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
> Some GPUs, namely, the bifrost/g72 part on MT8183, have a second
> regulator for their SRAM, let's add support for that.
>
> We extend the framework in a generic manner so that we could
> support more than 2 regulators, if required.
>
>
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 03:15:59PM +0800, Nicolas Boichat wrote:
> - I couldn't find a way to detect the number of regulators in the
>device tree, if we wanted to refuse to probe the device if there
>are too many regulators, which might be required for safety, see
>the thread on v2
Some GPUs, namely, the bifrost/g72 part on MT8183, have a second
regulator for their SRAM, let's add support for that.
We extend the framework in a generic manner so that we could
support more than 2 regulators, if required.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Boichat
---
v3:
- Make this more generic, by
