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:   Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:59:13 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
        Kamil Konieczny <k.konieczny@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: core: Skip balancing of the enabled
 regulators in regulator_enable()
Message-ID: <20191010072913.jsjdl6uc4qkbmlpa@vireshk-i7>
References: <86b9b4b5-cca5-9052-7c87-c5679dfffff4@samsung.com>
 <be8d3280-9855-ed18-b2ab-d7fb28d80b82@gmail.com>
 <20191008161535.GN4382@sirena.co.uk>
 <4ad890b7-705e-94f9-2e61-1f3a60984c91@gmail.com>
 <20191008171747.GS4382@sirena.co.uk>
 <439154a4-1502-40af-7086-d4e3eb24025f@gmail.com>
 <CGME20191008180759epcas3p3c367142db499635c71d9601dd3e63956@epcas3p3.samsung.com>
 <20191008180750.GT4382@sirena.co.uk>
 <c9e3ff21-ec50-97c2-06cb-b2f44c70eac8@samsung.com>
 <20191009141352.GC3929@sirena.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191009141352.GC3929@sirena.co.uk>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 09-10-19, 15:13, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:29:00PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> 
> > Okay, then what is the conclusion, as I got lost a bit? How do you want 
> > this issue to be fixed?
> 
> We should revert the enable call, it shouldn't be required, and ideally
> the default balancer could be updated to only make configuration changes
> if they're actually required which would help avoid triggering any such
> things in future if we don't absolutely have to.

Sorry for the delay in responding, just came back after vacations.

Should the OPP change be reverted ? Someone going to send that revert to me with
the required explanation ?

-- 
viresh