| Message ID | d3563864d03a3d3450cf00b3be05465dc506e161.1645092563.git.sylv@sylv.io (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add supply into PWBUS_REGULATOR macro | expand |
On 2/17/22 02:23, Marcello Sylvester Bauer wrote: > Add optional regulator supply into PWBUS_REGULATOR macro. This makes it The code doesn't look optional to me. What exactly is optional ? > possible to define a vin-supply in DT. Not defining a supply will only > cause the following debug output: > > ``` > Looking up vin-supply property in node [...] failed > ``` > > Signed-off-by: Marcello Sylvester Bauer <sylv@sylv.io> > --- > drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > index e0aa8aa46d8c..38f049d68d32 100644 > --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > @@ -464,6 +464,7 @@ extern const struct regulator_ops pmbus_regulator_ops; > #define PMBUS_REGULATOR(_name, _id) \ > [_id] = { \ > .name = (_name # _id), \ > + .supply_name = "vin", \ > .id = (_id), \ > .of_match = of_match_ptr(_name # _id), \ > .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("regulators"), \ That seems to be quite far reaching. How does this affect / change behavior of existing systems which so far did not expect supply_name to be set ? Guenter
On Thu, 2022-02-17 at 09:36 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 2/17/22 02:23, Marcello Sylvester Bauer wrote: > > Add optional regulator supply into PWBUS_REGULATOR macro. This > > makes it > > The code doesn't look optional to me. What exactly is optional ? I mean, it is optional to add a supply. It should not cause errors if you don't. I should probably reword this, too. > > > possible to define a vin-supply in DT. Not defining a supply will > > only > > cause the following debug output: > > > > ``` > > Looking up vin-supply property in node [...] failed > > ``` > > > > Signed-off-by: Marcello Sylvester Bauer <sylv@sylv.io> > > --- > > drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > index e0aa8aa46d8c..38f049d68d32 100644 > > --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > @@ -464,6 +464,7 @@ extern const struct regulator_ops > > pmbus_regulator_ops; > > #define PMBUS_REGULATOR(_name, _id) \ > > [_id] = { \ > > .name = (_name # _id), \ > > + .supply_name = "vin", \ > > .id = (_id), \ > > .of_match = of_match_ptr(_name # _id), \ > > .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("regulators"), \ > > That seems to be quite far reaching. How does this affect / change > behavior > of existing systems which so far did not expect supply_name to be set > ? > > Guenter
On Thu, 2022-02-17 at 18:40 +0100, sylv wrote: > On Thu, 2022-02-17 at 09:36 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > On 2/17/22 02:23, Marcello Sylvester Bauer wrote: > > > Add optional regulator supply into PWBUS_REGULATOR macro. This > > > makes it > > > > The code doesn't look optional to me. What exactly is optional ? > > I mean, it is optional to add a supply. It should not cause errors if > you don't. I should probably reword this, too. > > > > > > possible to define a vin-supply in DT. Not defining a supply will > > > only > > > cause the following debug output: > > > > > > ``` > > > Looking up vin-supply property in node [...] failed > > > ``` > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marcello Sylvester Bauer <sylv@sylv.io> > > > --- > > > drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h | 1 + > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > > b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > > index e0aa8aa46d8c..38f049d68d32 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h > > > @@ -464,6 +464,7 @@ extern const struct regulator_ops > > > pmbus_regulator_ops; > > > #define PMBUS_REGULATOR(_name, _id) \ > > > [_id] = { \ > > > .name = (_name # _id), \ > > > + .supply_name = "vin", \ > > > .id = (_id), \ > > > .of_match = of_match_ptr(_name # _id), \ > > > .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("regulators"), \ > > > > That seems to be quite far reaching. How does this affect / change > > behavior > > of existing systems which so far did not expect supply_name to be > > set > > ? > > > > Guenter > My goal is to make it optional to define a supply regulator so that it is possible to regulate the incoming voltage regulator. IIUIC, it is required to set a supply_name to tell the regulator core which supply it should look up from DT. (see: of_get_regulator drivers/regulator/core.c:402) This should not cause a change of behavior even if no supply is defined. It would register a dummy regulator as supply instead. Am I right, or did I misunderstanding something? Thanks, Marcello
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h index e0aa8aa46d8c..38f049d68d32 100644 --- a/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h +++ b/drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h @@ -464,6 +464,7 @@ extern const struct regulator_ops pmbus_regulator_ops; #define PMBUS_REGULATOR(_name, _id) \ [_id] = { \ .name = (_name # _id), \ + .supply_name = "vin", \ .id = (_id), \ .of_match = of_match_ptr(_name # _id), \ .regulators_node = of_match_ptr("regulators"), \
Add optional regulator supply into PWBUS_REGULATOR macro. This makes it possible to define a vin-supply in DT. Not defining a supply will only cause the following debug output: ``` Looking up vin-supply property in node [...] failed ``` Signed-off-by: Marcello Sylvester Bauer <sylv@sylv.io> --- drivers/hwmon/pmbus/pmbus.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)