MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161031162226.f4flffnjxxsqi33q@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20161026190054.11968-1-ahaslam@baylibre.com> <20161026190054.11968-2-ahaslam@baylibre.com>
 <20161028182250.df6p6setaauxsezu@sirena.org.uk> <CAKXjFTNtcdTQJ_Gee87NTv3_RZscVjg4UWLkLVCZFE-TrXfsxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20161029184031.adjybckguxzfu3pq@sirena.org.uk> <CAKXjFTPri=KyUEnO_V+x4V3iewa-TLMwZvJWE__U30YBRSTgrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20161031162226.f4flffnjxxsqi33q@sirena.org.uk>
From: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@baylibre.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 16:47:33 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKXjFTNi3G5vsf9MnGPEhKYH=+vHdz1ootmntXz5Dnk+RObajA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] regulator: core: Add over current changed event
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>, Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>,
        David Lechner <david@lechnology.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1522
Lines: 35

Hi Mark,

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 01:02:21PM +0100, Axel Haslam wrote:
>
>> The event  REGULATOR_EVENT_OVER_CURRENT allready exists.
>> what is missing and what i would need form the usb driver, is a way for
>> the consumer to know that the over current condition is over.
>> since i cannot do this with get mode, and get status is not exported,
>
>> We can do this adding a more generic event flag:
>> REGULATOR_EVENT_ERRORS_CLEARED
>
>> that would be sent by the supply when all errors are over, and the
>> regulator is back to  normal operation.
>
> That's a different thing and definitely not what you were saying in the
> changelog.  I don't think this is something that it makes sense to do
> with events as it's not something that devices will tend to generate
> interrupts for, anything that is going to rely on events for that is
> going to be broken.  Hardware is mostly designed with the idea that
> errors are catastrophic.
>
> If you really care about things clearing then you need to add a sensible
> interface for exposting all the possible error conditions that users can
> poll.  The reason get_mode() got rejected was that error statuses and
> modes are completely different things, get_status() is not going to work
> for you since it is very common for multiple errors to happen at the
> same time.

Ok, sorry if i was unclear in the change log.
ill add a new interface and lets see if it makes more sense in v2.

Regards
Axel.