Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751700AbbG0K7B (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2015 06:59:01 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:36154 "EHLO mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751088AbbG0K66 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2015 06:58:58 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:58:53 +0100 From: Lee Jones To: Mark Brown Cc: Bjorn Andersson , "bjorn@kryo.se" , Andy Gross , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Samuel Ortiz , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/11] mfd: devicetree: bindings: Add Qualcomm SMD based RPM DT binding Message-ID: <20150727105853.GA21114@x1> References: <20150707121609.GZ3182@x1> <20150713214836.GA15178@usrtlx11787.corpusers.net> <20150723133133.GB3436@x1> <20150723164128.GD4753@usrtlx11787.corpusers.net> <20150723171638.GE11162@sirena.org.uk> <20150724095847.GC3436@x1> <20150724102434.GF11162@sirena.org.uk> <20150724172316.GR11162@sirena.org.uk> <20150727072918.GU3436@x1> <20150727095347.GU11162@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20150727095347.GU11162@sirena.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1931 Lines: 50 On Mon, 27 Jul 2015, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 08:29:18AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Jul 2015, Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:24:34AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > From here: > > > > > > > > + pm8941-regulators { > > > > > > > + compatible = "qcom,rpm-pm8941-regulators"; > > > > > > > + vdd_l13_l20_l23_l24-supply = <&pm8941_boost>; > > > > > > > I'd like Mark to glance at this. > > > Mark: Is this new property okay? > > As far as I can see that looks like a standard supply property, assuming > the supply is actually called that why would it be an issue? > > > > The specified range of the regulator is 1.75-1.85V and this is handled > > > by the implementation, however the board designers have stated that it > > > is only allowed to be configured to 1.8V. > > > > So DT is used to narrow the capabilities of the individual component to > > > something that's suitable for this particular system. > > > > > We still need Mark to look at this. > > > Is it okay for the regulator-{min,max}-microvolt to be artificially > > restricted to the required value, despite knowing that the regulator > > is capable of supply {more,less} voltage? > > Yes, that's the entire purpose of those properties - to set the limits > the board designers have which will typically be more restrictive than > those that the regulator itself is capable of imposing. All fine then. Please re-submit with the changes we discussed. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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/