Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 6 Jul 2012 15:37:42 +0530 | From | Laxman Dewangan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ARM: tegra: cardhu: add dt entry for PMIC TPS65911. |
| |
On Friday 06 July 2012 12:46 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 07/04/2012 09:07 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> Tegra30 based platform "cardhu" have the power management >> IC TPS65911 for the regulator. >> Adding DT entry for this device. >> >> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan<ldewangan@nvidia.com> > I recall there were some differences between Cardhu A02 and A04. Does > this patch apply equally to both?
Yes, this piece is common. I already sent the splitting A02 and A04 which is having some differences in the fixed regulator GPIOs. It is pending for internal review.
> Please have a look at the recent threads re: various Tegra20 boards' > regulator .dts files, and see the results at: > > git://nv-tegra.nvidia.com/user/swarren/linux-2.6 linux-next_common > > Most of these comments are driven by comments made in the review of > those patches. > > In the patch description, can you please specify where you got all the > values from, and any discrepancies.
Ok, I will do.
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra30-cardhu.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra30-cardhu.dts >> + vdd1_reg: regulator@0 { >> + reg =<0>; >> + regulator-compatible = "vdd1"; >> + regulator-name = "vdd_1v2_gen"; > It'd be good to list all the signals that these regulators drive > directly; the schematics "rename" the signals quite a lot.
Will add wherever it is possible.
>> + regulator-min-microvolt =< 600000>; >> + regulator-max-microvolt =<1500000>; > Similarly, the contraints should list the exact voltage that's required > of the regulators, not a range. Right now, there is no DVFS in the > mainline kernel, so even for rails where DVFS could be used in the > future, we should specify the single voltage we want these rails to run > at without DVFS for now. > Fine, will provide the one voltage. >> + regulator-always-on; >> + regulator-boot-on; > These properties aren't in the same order in all the nodes. It'd be nice > to have them ordered the same way everywhere. > > I'm not sure if it really makes sense to specify regulator-boot-on, > since there's no way to know what SW has run before the kernel which > might have turned off the regulator; regulator-always-on seems to cover > all necessary use-cases.
| |