Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 20 Nov 2018 15:36:10 +0000
From:   Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
To:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
CC:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <patches@opensource.cirrus.com>
Subject: Re: Applied "regulator: wm8994: Pass descriptor instead of GPIO
 number" to the regulator tree
Message-ID: <20181120153610.GD16508@imbe.wolfsonmicro.main>
References: <20180517164120.485F844007E@finisterre.ee.mobilebroadband>
 <CGME20181120134333eucas1p27a19912dddf4b9b34da505e0973c9137@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
 <66d3b74c-0152-b17b-89d4-a21d33445b25@samsung.com>
 <20181120144700.GB16508@imbe.wolfsonmicro.main>
 <f1c7e9fe-aa57-c7c4-1c2f-02105a5a7474@samsung.com>
 <20181120153215.GC16508@imbe.wolfsonmicro.main>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181120153215.GC16508@imbe.wolfsonmicro.main>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 03:32:15PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 03:58:59PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > On 2018-11-20 15:47, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 02:43:32PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> > >> On 2018-05-17 18:41, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >>> Subject: [PATCH] regulator: wm8994: Pass descriptor instead of GPIO number
> > >> This patch causes following kernel warning on Samsung Exynos4412 based
> > >> Trats2 board:
> > >>
> > >> wm8994 4-001a: Failed to get supply 'DBVDD1': -517
> > >> wm8994 4-001a: Failed to get supplies: -517
> This is really weird, because the error in your log relates to
> DBVDD1 which is an independent regulator supplied by a separate
> regulator. I am really having some difficulty seeing how the
> patch interfers. It is definitely that patch which causes the
> issue, like you revert it and things work again?

Wait does the board still boot just you have an extra probe defer
now? Or does it actually fail?

Thanks,
Charles