Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: do not balance regulators without
 constraints
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, peron.clem@gmail.com,
        Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>
From:   Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Message-ID: <56e496bc-172f-d62f-5376-c8d734af6a51@samsung.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 May 2020 07:45:06 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
        Thunderbird/68.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200528134338.GD3606@sirena.org.uk>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
CMS-TYPE: 201P
References: <CGME20200528131144eucas1p121b9151996fa3f780a5028f68c69d5ba@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
        <20200528131130.17984-1-m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
        <20200528134338.GD3606@sirena.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Mark,

On 28.05.2020 15:43, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 03:11:30PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> Balancing coupled regulators must wait until the clients for all of the
>> coupled regualtors set their constraints, otherwise the balancing code
>> might change the voltage of the not-yet-constrained regulator to the
>> value below the bootloader-configured operation point, what might cause a
>> system crash.
> This forces every supply to have something which explicitly manages
> voltages which means that if one of the coupled supplies doesn't really
> care about the voltage (perhaps doesn't even have any explicit
> consumers) and just needs to be within a certain range of another supply
> then it'll end up restricting things needlessly.
Frankly, that's exactly what we need for Exynos5422 case. If devfreq 
driver is not enabled/compiled, we want to keep the "vdd_int" volatage 
unchanged. This confirms me that we really need to have a custom coupler 
for Exynos5422 case. It will solve such issues without adding hacks to 
regulator core.
> Saravana was trying to do some stuff with sync_state() which might be
> interesting here although I have concerns with that approach too:
>
>     https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200527074057.246606-1-saravanak@google.com/

This still doesn't solve the above mentioned case.

Best regards
-- 
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland