On Wednesday 14 September 2016 05:26 PM, Przemyslaw Marczak wrote:
Hello Keerthy,
On 09/14/2016 10:24 AM, Keerthy wrote:
Hi Marczak,
On Wednesday 14 September 2016 01:33 PM, Przemyslaw Marczak wrote:
Hello Keerthy,
On 09/14/2016 06:28 AM, Keerthy wrote:
The ctrl reg contains bit fields to enable and disable regulators,
and volt_reg has the bit fields to configure the voltage values.
The registers are frequently accessed hence make them part
of dm_regulator_uclass_platdata structure.
Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keer...@ti.com>
---
include/power/regulator.h | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/power/regulator.h b/include/power/regulator.h
index 9bcd728..57b14a3 100644
--- a/include/power/regulator.h
+++ b/include/power/regulator.h
@@ -171,6 +171,8 @@ struct dm_regulator_uclass_platdata {
bool boot_on;
const char *name;
int flags;
+ u8 ctrl_reg;
+ u8 volt_reg;
};
/* Regulator device operations */
This structure above is used for some common "high-level" data, which
can be used by regulator uclass driver.
Even if most of PMICs has some ctrl/volt/etc regs, the regulator uclass
driver doesn't know, how to use it, so from this point of view it is
useless.
But, you can keep device/driver data in a proper fields. Please look at
those files:
drivers/power/regulator/fixed.c:119
drivers/power/regulator/pfuze100.c:567
To store some device internal data, you can use:
.platdata_auto_alloc_size -> with access by dev_get_platdata()
.priv_auto_alloc_size -> with access by dev_get_priv()
Thanks for a quick review. I did look at some of those options before
introducing volt and ctrl here.
Many PMICs will have ctrl/volt registers we might end up having lot of
private strutures with the same ctrl/volt fields. I agree uclass
driver will not know how to use it.
If i have to draw parallels from the kernel world regulator_desc is a
common structure which hosts vsel_reg/enable_reg fields.
Isn't it better to have a common structure instead of having a some
platform specific structure that might have the same fields?
Let me know your thoughts on this.
Best regards,
You are right and I agree with you that make things common is a good
approach.
At the begin of introducing this framework, I just wanted to provide a
simple user interface for regulators, so I didn't tried to put all
common things into a single structure, because not always it could be
useful.
The present structure layout seems to be a good representation of
regulator's node in the device-tree.
In the other hand, each driver can provide a static arrays with proper
data like reg/mask/etc,
the driver:
drivers/power/regulator/s5m8767.c- is a good example.
I'm not going to break your solution, but let's wait for Simon's opinion.
okay.
Best regards,
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
