Re: [PATCH 2/2] regulator: Add TPS65185 driver

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, Dec 24, 2025 at 09:12:35AM +0100, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Every little helps, and not every I2C controller is a model of
> > efficiency and programmability.  Note that we do have core support for
> > GPIO enables, it's not really any effort to support them.

> If the GPIO is wired... There are a half a dozen different implementations
> of this driver in the wild, and I remember one not using a GPIO
> probably for a device without the enable gpio wired up to the SoC.
> So I think the i2c way of enabling things is required at least
> as a fallback option. So we need some if (enable_gpio) somewhere.

This is utterly standard for devices with GPIO enables, the core will
handle this gracefully.

> > It does feel like something where if we're going to do it we should
> > update the core to take runtime PM references rather than open coding it
> > in a driver that's otherwise able to use the standard helpers.  I do
> > worry about the impact on enable times (you'd have to power up the
> > supply and sync the register cache) but I guess people could disable
> > runtime PM for specific devices if it's an issue, and it'll never apply
> > to primary PMICs anyway.

> hmm, we have REGULATOR_MODE_FAST to maybe disable some pm. I have used

That's a very different thing and completely inappropriate here.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature