Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753784AbYJ1LYl (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:24:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752772AbYJ1LYb (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:24:31 -0400 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.105.134]:33006 "EHLO mgw-mx09.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752759AbYJ1LYa (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:24:30 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 13:23:41 +0200 From: Felipe Balbi To: ext Jonathan Cameron Cc: eric miao , Liam Girdwood , LKML Subject: Re: [Regulator RFC] da903x: Where should usb charge pump support go? Message-ID: <20081028112341.GF27144@gandalf.research.nokia.com> Reply-To: felipe.balbi@nokia.com References: <4906F500.7080100@cam.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4906F500.7080100@cam.ac.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Oct 2008 11:23:50.0750 (UTC) FILETIME=[A70917E0:01C938EF] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1438 Lines: 36 On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:18:24AM +0000, ext Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Dear All, > > The new da903x driver is proving to be a good replacement for the out of kernel > driver I've been using previously. > > Unfortunately there is still quite a lot of functionality to to add. > > The key one for me is control of the USB charge pump. So the question is, does > this fit within the regulator framework (i.e. should I add it to the regulator > driver) or should this be a seperate driver (and if so where?) > > Personally I'm not convinced it fits cleanly within the regulator framework > given it is probably only ever going to get called from one driver and has > somewhat odd properties! I was thinking the same and even mailed Liam and Mark about it. The design I was thinking was the charger chip would be done in regulator framework and the battery chip (or current gauge) would be using power supply fw and regulator consumer device. The constraints would be basically the current and/or voltage range your charger chip supports. I still didn't have much time to hack on it, but seemed to be pretty reasonable. If someone has better idea, I'd trully like to hear that. -- balbi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/