Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:41:55AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Yeah, and I don't think that's unreasonable for the core to do - just > > drop the voltage to the constraint minimum after it has turned off the > > regulator, then recheck and

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:41:55AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Yeah, and I don't think that's unreasonable for the core to do - just > > drop the voltage to the constraint minimum after it has turned off the > > regulator, then recheck and

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > If we're just going to use the most recently set voltage then hopefully >> > the hardware already knew that, and

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > If we're just going to use the most recently set voltage then hopefully >> > the hardware already knew that, and

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > If we're just going to use the most recently set voltage then hopefully > > the hardware already knew that, and it might not be the lowest available > > voltage if the last

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > If we're just going to use the most recently set voltage then hopefully > > the hardware already knew that, and it might not be the lowest available > > voltage if the last

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:09:02AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > It needs something to tell it what the new voltage to set is. > >> The regulator driver has its own cache of what

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:13 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:09:02AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > It needs something to tell it what the new voltage to set is. > >> The regulator driver has its own cache of what

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:09:02AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > It needs something to tell it what the new voltage to set is. > The regulator driver has its own cache of what voltage was most > recently requested by Linux. It can use

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:09:02AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > It needs something to tell it what the new voltage to set is. > The regulator driver has its own cache of what voltage was most > recently requested by Linux. It can use

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > Without the core doing something the regulator isn't going to get told >> > that anything updated voltages

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > Without the core doing something the regulator isn't going to get told >> > that anything updated voltages

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Without the core doing something the regulator isn't going to get told > > that anything updated voltages anyway... > I was just suggesting that when the core tells the

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:06:16AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Without the core doing something the regulator isn't going to get told > > that anything updated voltages anyway... > I was just suggesting that when the core tells the

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:34:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > What you're describing sounds like what we should be doing normally, if >> > we're not doing that we should

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:34:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > What you're describing sounds like what we should be doing normally, if >> > we're not doing that we should

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:34:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > What you're describing sounds like what we should be doing normally, if > > we're not doing that we should probably be fixing the core. > I'm not convinced that this behavior

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 08:34:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > What you're describing sounds like what we should be doing normally, if > > we're not doing that we should probably be fixing the core. > I'm not convinced that this behavior

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 07:46:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> >> Linux vote for the lowest voltage it's comfortable with. Linux keeps >> >> track of the true voltage that the

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 8:02 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 07:46:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> >> Linux vote for the lowest voltage it's comfortable with. Linux keeps >> >> track of the true voltage that the

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 07:46:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> Linux vote for the lowest voltage it's comfortable with. Linux keeps > >> track of the true voltage that the driver wants and will always change > >> its vote back to that

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 07:46:50AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> Linux vote for the lowest voltage it's comfortable with. Linux keeps > >> track of the true voltage that the driver wants and will always change > >> its vote back to that

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:30:33PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > Yes, that's definitely not what's expected but it's unfortunately what >> > the firmware chose to implement so we

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:30:33PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > Yes, that's definitely not what's expected but it's unfortunately what >> > the firmware chose to implement so we

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:30:33PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Yes, that's definitely not what's expected but it's unfortunately what > > the firmware chose to implement so we may well be stuck with it > > unfortunately. > We're not

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:30:33PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Yes, that's definitely not what's expected but it's unfortunately what > > the firmware chose to implement so we may well be stuck with it > > unfortunately. > We're not

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:50:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > It's got to be valid to think about the voltage of a disabled regulator >> > since drivers want to be able make

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:50:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > It's got to be valid to think about the voltage of a disabled regulator >> > since drivers want to be able make

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:50:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > It's got to be valid to think about the voltage of a disabled regulator > > since drivers want to be able make sure that the regulator gets enabled > > with

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:50:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > It's got to be valid to think about the voltage of a disabled regulator > > since drivers want to be able make sure that the regulator gets enabled > > with a sensible config.

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:23:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >> >> > It's arguable either way - you could say that the client gets

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:23:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >> >> > It's arguable either way - you could say that the client gets to specify >> > a safe range at all times

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:23:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > > It's arguable either way - you could say that the client gets to specify > > a safe range at all times or you could say that the machine

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 08:23:22AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > > It's arguable either way - you could say that the client gets to specify > > a safe range at all times or you could say that the machine constraints > > should cover

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > It's arguable either way - you could say that the client gets to specify > a safe range at all times or you could say that the machine constraints > should cover all cases where the hardware is idling. Of course RPMh

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > It's arguable either way - you could say that the client gets to specify > a safe range at all times or you could say that the machine constraints > should cover all cases where the hardware is idling. Of course RPMh > is missing

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 05:08:45PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > So one client's vote for a voltage continues to be in effect even if > that client votes to have the regulator disabled? That seems > fundamentally broken in RPMh. I guess my take would be to work around It's arguable either way

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 05:08:45PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > So one client's vote for a voltage continues to be in effect even if > that client votes to have the regulator disabled? That seems > fundamentally broken in RPMh. I guess my take would be to work around It's arguable either way

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 6:19 PM, David Collins wrote: OK, so how's this for a proposal then: 1. For RPMh-regulator whenever we see a "set voltage" but Linux hasn't specified that the regulator is enabled then we don't send the voltage, we

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 6:19 PM, David Collins wrote: OK, so how's this for a proposal then: 1. For RPMh-regulator whenever we see a "set voltage" but Linux hasn't specified that the regulator is enabled then we don't send the voltage, we just cache it. 2.

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/22/2018 05:08 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:46 PM, David Collins > wrote: >> On 05/22/2018 09:43 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins >>> wrote: ... >> However, if the voltage

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/22/2018 05:08 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:46 PM, David Collins > wrote: >> On 05/22/2018 09:43 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins >>> wrote: ... >> However, if the voltage caching feature is acceptable for upstream usage,

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:46 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/22/2018 09:43 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins >> wrote: > ... >>> Returning the cached (but not sent) initial voltage equal to the min

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 3:46 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/22/2018 09:43 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins >> wrote: > ... >>> Returning the cached (but not sent) initial voltage equal to the min >>> constraint voltage in get_voltage() calls

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/22/2018 09:43 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins > wrote: ... >> Returning the cached (but not sent) initial voltage equal to the min >> constraint voltage in get_voltage() calls should not cause any problems. >> This

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/22/2018 09:43 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins > wrote: ... >> Returning the cached (but not sent) initial voltage equal to the min >> constraint voltage in get_voltage() calls should not cause any problems. >> This represents the highest voltage

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:43:02AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins > wrote: > > Returning the cached (but not sent) initial voltage equal to the min > > constraint voltage in get_voltage() calls should not cause any problems.

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:43:02AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins > wrote: > > Returning the cached (but not sent) initial voltage equal to the min > > constraint voltage in get_voltage() calls should not cause any problems. > > This represents the

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/21/2018 11:01 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 5:46 PM, David Collins >> wrote: > ... >>> Something to keep in mind about the downstream rpmh-regulator driver

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 5:00 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/21/2018 11:01 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 5:46 PM, David Collins >> wrote: > ... >>> Something to keep in mind about the downstream rpmh-regulator driver is >>> that it caches the initial voltages

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/21/2018 11:01 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 5:46 PM, David Collins > wrote: ... >> Something to keep in mind about the downstream rpmh-regulator driver is >> that it caches the initial voltages specified in device tree and only >> sends them

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/21/2018 11:01 AM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 5:46 PM, David Collins > wrote: ... >> Something to keep in mind about the downstream rpmh-regulator driver is >> that it caches the initial voltages specified in device tree and only >> sends them after a consumer driver

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 5:46 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/17/2018 06:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:16 PM, David Collins >> wrote: >>> On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: On Fri, May 11, 2018 at

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 5:46 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/17/2018 06:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:16 PM, David Collins >> wrote: >>> On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins wrote: > +-

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/17/2018 06:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:16 PM, David Collins > wrote: >> On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins >>> wrote: +-

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/17/2018 06:01 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:16 PM, David Collins > wrote: >> On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins >>> wrote: +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt + Usage: optional; VRM

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:16:13PM -0700, David Collins wrote: > On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins > > wrote: > >> +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt > >> + Usage: optional; VRM regulators only >

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 05:16:13PM -0700, David Collins wrote: > On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins > > wrote: > >> +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt > >> + Usage: optional; VRM regulators only > >> + Value type: >

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:16 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins >> wrote: >>> +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt >>> + Usage: optional; VRM

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 5:16 PM, David Collins wrote: > On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: >> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins >> wrote: >>> +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt >>> + Usage: optional; VRM regulators only >>> + Value type: >>> +

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins > wrote: >> +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt >> + Usage: optional; VRM regulators only >> + Value type: >> + Definition: Specifies the initial voltage

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

On 05/17/2018 02:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins > wrote: >> +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt >> + Usage: optional; VRM regulators only >> + Value type: >> + Definition: Specifies the initial voltage in microvolts to request

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins wrote: > +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt > + Usage: optional; VRM regulators only > + Value type: > + Definition: Specifies the initial voltage in microvolts to request > for a > +

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Hi, On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:28 PM, David Collins wrote: > +- qcom,regulator-initial-microvolt > + Usage: optional; VRM regulators only > + Value type: > + Definition: Specifies the initial voltage in microvolts to request > for a > + VRM regulator.

[PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Introduce bindings for RPMh regulator devices found on some Qualcomm Technlogies, Inc. SoCs. These devices allow a given processor within the SoC to make PMIC regulator requests which are aggregated within the RPMh hardware block along with requests from other processors in the SoC to determine

[PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings

Introduce bindings for RPMh regulator devices found on some Qualcomm Technlogies, Inc. SoCs. These devices allow a given processor within the SoC to make PMIC regulator requests which are aggregated within the RPMh hardware block along with requests from other processors in the SoC to determine