Re: [PATCH V2] regulator: core: add support for configuring turn-ontime through constraints

[Laxman Dewangan]

On Wednesday 11 September 2013 10:47 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 09/11/2013 06:58 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> > The Turn-on time of the regulator depends on the regulator device's
> > electrical characteristics. Sometimes regulator turn-on time also
> > depends on the capacitive load on the given platform and it can be
> > more than the datasheet value.
> >
> > The driver provides the enable-time as per datasheet.
> >
> > Add support for configure the enable ramp time through regulator
> > constraints so that regulator core can take this value for enable
> > time for that regulator.
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt
> >   - regulator-ramp-delay: ramp delay for regulator(in uV/uS)
> >     For hardwares which support disabling ramp rate, it should be explicitly
> >     intialised to zero (regulator-ramp-delay = <0>) for disabling ramp delay.
> > +- regulator-enable-ramp-delay: Turn-on time for regulator(in uSec). This is
> > +  the time time taken to reach within some proportion of the target voltage
> > +  from off state.
> This is still a bit unclear. What proportion of the target voltage?
> There's no mention that this describes the delay due to the
> board/environment rather than the delay due to the internal operation of
> the regulator itself. How about:
>
> - regulator-enable-ramp-delay: The time taken, in uSec, for the supply
> rail to reach the target voltage, plus/minus whatever tolerance the
> board design requires, once the regulator output itself has ramped up.
> This value is in addition to whatever built-in ramp time is inherent in
> the regulator's own internal design or configuration. This property
> describes the additional ramp time required due to board design issues
> such as trace capacitance and load on the supply.
>
> That's text repeats "additional" a bit, but I think describes the
> situation correctly?

I wanted to provide the absolute delay rather than additional delay on 
top of inherit delay from device.

--
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/