Re: [PATCH 1/1 v3] pwm_bl: Add support for backlight enable regulator

From: Alex Courbot
Date: Wed Mar 06 2013 - 03:37:49 EST


On 03/06/2013 04:00 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
* PGP Signed by an unknown key

On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 01:53:27PM +0900, Alex Courbot wrote:
On 03/06/2013 11:41 AM, Andrew Chew wrote:
struct pwm_bl_data {
struct pwm_device *pwm;
struct device *dev;
+ struct regulator *en_supply;
+ bool en_supply_enabled;

Couldn't you use regulator_is_enabled() and get rid of en_supply_enabled?
It would also ensure the driver performs correctly no matter what the initial
state of the regulator is.

Are you sure this works? I'm concerned about the (bizarre and unlikely) case
where this supply is shared with another driver, so I use en_supply_enabled
to track the state of the supply such that I can ignore that case.

You're right, consumers can share regulators and the calls to
enable/disable need to be balanced. Also there is no way to check
the intensity of the backlight prior to the change to detect a
transition, so I guess your approach is indeed the most appropriate
here.

I think the right thing to do here is just enable the regulator when
the pwm-backlight driver needs it. If it is shared with other devices
they'll have to do the same and the reference counting should only
disable the regulator when there are no users.
>
Tracking this via platform data won't work because platform data is
statically defined at compile time. So if indeed there was another user
of the regulator it enable/disable the regulator at any time and your
en_supply_enabled would be wrong.

Oh wait. I thought regulator_enable/disable calls needed to be balanced, is that not the case? So every consumer receives a different regulator handle in case of a shared regulator, which becomes disabled if all handles are disabled? In that case yes, we won't have to bother about a status variable here and balancing calls. Sorry for the confusion.

Alex.

--
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/