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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: davinci: ohci-da8xx: model the vbus GPIO as a
 fixed regulator
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
        Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
CC:     <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
References: <20190326155728.5432-1-brgl@bgdev.pl>
From:   Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
Message-ID: <712540aa-6927-9141-4f0c-740193d26f33@ti.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Mar 2019 17:07:26 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190326155728.5432-1-brgl@bgdev.pl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Bart,

On 26/03/19 9:27 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
> 
> Adding the vbus GPIO support to the ohci-da8xx driver isn't really the
> optimal solution. Rather: it should be modeled as a fixed regulator
> in which case the driver already has support.

Can you clarify "driver already has support"? You are introducing
support to use the VBUS gpio as regulator as part of 3/3.

I do see other instances of VBUS regulator being used in USB tree. But
we just converted the driver to use VBUS and over-current GPIOs in v5.1.
So this is a bit of "churn".

Can you document why the current solution is not optimal? Is it to make
future device-tree conversion for these boards easier? Or?

> 
> This series adds necessary fixups to the board files and removes the
> vbus GPIO from the ohci driver.

Thanks,
Sekhar