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

From: Doug Anderson
Date: Wed May 23 2018 - 10:30:07 EST


On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> 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 anything like the machine constraints (as we can see from all
> the fixing up of undesirable hard coding we have to do) so it's kind of
> pushed towards the first case.

OK, fair enough. If others all agree that it's OK to make requests
about the voltage of a disabled regulator then I won't stand in the
way. I guess it does call into question the whole idea of caching /
not sending the voltage until the first enable because it means
there's no way for the client to use this feature until they've
enabled / disabled the regulator once. If you think of it as invalid
to adjust the voltage of a disabled regulator then the caching
argument is super clean, but once you say that you should normally be
able to do it it feels more like a hacky workaround. ...but I suppose
that's what we've got to live with...