Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] iio: adc: Add support for TI ADC108S102 and ADC128S102 | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Fri, 05 May 2017 23:32:03 +0300 |
| |
On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 22:09 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2017-05-05 20:52, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On 05/05/17 11:39, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > On 2017-05-05 11:54, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 08:31 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>> + if (st->reg) > > > > > + *val = > > > > > regulator_get_voltage(st->reg) > > > > > / 1000; > > > > > + else > > > > > + *val = st->va_millivolt; > > > > > + > > > > > > > > Another way is to not just hard code the value, but create a > > > > fixed > > > > voltage regulator out of it. In this case you will have one way > > > > to get > > > > its value. > > > > > > That's a good idea. > > > > Agreed. Make sure to cc Mark Brown though as I'll need an ack from > > him > > to have a fixed reg hiding in here. > > After diving deeper, it not longer appears to be a good idea: > > - pulls in a non-obvious requirement for CONFIG_REGULATOR on platforms > that otherwise do not need it
Why is it a problem?
> - requires complex life-cycle management so that the fixed regulator > is > instantiated on the first device creation and removed with the last > one
Who cares if you register more than one?
> We better go with the static value assignment. > > I'll move that regulator_get_voltage into the probing function which > will simplify things further (va_millivolt will carry the value for > both > cases).
Yes, it would be the way, if system has it's fixed.
But in this case you need to threat regulator as optional if we are going to enable/disable them for PM.
-- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Intel Finland Oy
| |