Re: [PATCH 1/2] MMC/pxamci: workaround regulator framework bugs

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 07:36:20PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 29 June 2009, Mark Brown wrote:

> > At the minute the regulator API actually copes pretty well with this -
> > the only problem I'm aware of is with drivers like the MMC driver which
> > require exclusive control of the regulator.

> Which is a fairly typical situation for power-aware drivers.

As has been mentioned a number of times in previous discussions of this
there is a very large class of devices which do not *require* any power
control at all but which can usefully switch their supplies on and off.

> Which belies your claim that the regulator API "copes pretty well".
> It'd be more accurate to say "broken-as-designed", since you have
> rejected numerous attempts to fix this, yet not fixed it yourself.

You've suggested variations of essentially one approach, forcing the
regulator to be off while the use count is zero.  In response to this
you've not only been given explanations of the problems this causes but
also several suggestions for alternative approaches such as adding a way
to request exclusive use of the regulator or adding something in
constraints to turn off the regulator at startup.

I have previously had to ask you to try to approach discussions on the
regulator API in a more constructive fashion, please let me renew that
request.  Doing so would be much less time consuming and for that reason
if nothing else would be very helpful in progressing things.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/