lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PROBLEM: bindings for drivers/mfd/twl4030-power.c
On 09/03/2014 01:45 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> [140901 09:54]:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 25.08.2014 um 23:26 schrieb Tony Lindgren:
>>
>>> * Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> [140817 08:46]:
>>>> I am trying to make ti,use_poweroff work on 3.17-rc1 for the GTA04 board.
>>>> Poweroff was broken for a while and I found that the driver isn't loaded at all.
>>>>
>>>> It appears to me that commit e7cd1d1eb16fcdf53001b926187a82f1f3e1a7e6
>>>> did rename the compatible entry from "ti,twl4030-power" to "ti,twl4030-power-reset"
>>>> but this was not documented in the bindings and of course our DT does not
>>>> match.
>>>>
>>>> Even your commit message talks about "ti,twl4030-power" although I can't find it
>>>> in the code.
>>>
>>> Hmm sorry did I accidentally remove ti,twl4030-power? If so, that should
>>> be added back for sure. Do you have a patch for that already?
>>
>> No, I have only updated our device tree because I don't know if it really should
>> be added back or not.
>>
>> As you say the "ti,twl4030-power" does not configure anything. So what
>> is it good for?
>
> Only for the poweroff if "ti,use_poweroff" is set. Care to do a patch
> as you clearly have a use case to test it with?

Tony, we were talking about supporting ti,system-power-controller as
the standard way of stating poweroff control is by the PMIC. this
seems to be standard in various SoCs. use_poweroff seems to predate
that standardization. Should'nt we start using
ti,system-power-controller instead?

--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-09-03 21:21    [W:0.060 / U:0.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site