Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754880AbaBGMKK (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Feb 2014 07:10:10 -0500 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:42309 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932454AbaBGLv5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Feb 2014 06:51:57 -0500 From: Luis Henriques To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com Cc: Mark Brown , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Luis Henriques Subject: [PATCH 3.11 185/233] ACPI / init: Flag use of ACPI and ACPI idioms for power supplies to regulator API Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 11:46:44 +0000 Message-Id: <1391773652-25214-186-git-send-email-luis.henriques@canonical.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.3.2 In-Reply-To: <1391773652-25214-1-git-send-email-luis.henriques@canonical.com> References: <1391773652-25214-1-git-send-email-luis.henriques@canonical.com> X-Extended-Stable: 3.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 3.11.10.4 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Mark Brown commit 49a12877d2777cadcb838981c3c4f5a424aef310 upstream. There is currently no facility in ACPI to express the hookup of voltage regulators, the expectation is that the regulators that exist in the system will be handled transparently by firmware if they need software control at all. This means that if for some reason the regulator API is enabled on such a system it should assume that any supplies that devices need are provided by the system at all relevant times without any software intervention. Tell the regulator core to make this assumption by calling regulator_has_full_constraints(). Do this as soon as we know we are using ACPI so that the information is available to the regulator core as early as possible. This will cause the regulator core to pretend that there is an always on regulator supplying any supply that is requested but that has not otherwise been mapped which is the behaviour expected on a system with ACPI. Should the ability to specify regulators be added in future revisions of ACPI then once we have support for ACPI mappings in the kernel the same assumptions will apply. It is also likely that systems will default to a mode of operation which does not require any interpretation of these mappings in order to be compatible with existing operating system releases so it should remain safe to make these assumptions even if the mappings exist but are not supported by the kernel. Signed-off-by: Mark Brown Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques --- drivers/acpi/bus.c | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c index a5bb33b..80d8a23 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #ifdef CONFIG_X86 #include #endif @@ -704,6 +705,14 @@ void __init acpi_early_init(void) goto error0; } + /* + * If the system is using ACPI then we can be reasonably + * confident that any regulators are managed by the firmware + * so tell the regulator core it has everything it needs to + * know. + */ + regulator_has_full_constraints(); + return; error0: -- 1.8.3.2 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/