[PATCH] ARM: OMAP: PM: only register TWL with voltage layer when device is present

[Premi, Sanjeev]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hilman, Kevin 
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 5:25 AM
> To: Premi, Sanjeev
> Cc: linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; 
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; Koyamangalath, Abhilash
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: PM: only register TWL with 
> voltage layer when device is present
> 
> "Premi, Sanjeev" <premi at ti.com> writes:
> 
> >  
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Hilman, Kevin 
> >> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 12:04 AM
> >> To: Premi, Sanjeev
> >> Cc: linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; 
> >> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; Koyamangalath, Abhilash
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: PM: only register TWL with 
> >> voltage layer when device is present
> >> 
> >> "Premi, Sanjeev" <premi at ti.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> >> Current code registers voltage layer details for TWL PMIC 
> >> even when a
> >> >> TWL has not been registered.  Fix this to only register 
> >> the TWL with
> >> >> voltage layer when the TWL PMIC is initialized by 
> board-level code.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman at ti.com>
> >> 
> >> [...]
> >> 
> >> > I have been out-of-loop from PM for some time. So my query may be
> >> > redundant:
> >> >
> >> > 1) What happens when different PMIC (not TWL series) is 
> registered
> >> >    for AM35x? e.g. TPS65023
> >> >    http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg48630.html
> >> >
> >> > 2) Wouldn't we still fall back into omap3_twl_init()?
> >> 
> >> I'm not sure I follow the question.
> >> 
> >> If you're not using a TWL PMIC (or similar derivative) then
> >> omap*_twl_init() should not be called.
> >> 
> >> If you are using a TWL PMIC, then no, the omap*_twl_init functions
> >> should not be called.
> >
> > When I read this function (in the patch), if pmic_i2c_board_info.irq
> > is non-zero, omap3_twl_init() and omap4_twl_init() are called.
> >
> > So my question was, for the case when PMIC is not TWL family. Then,
> > is checking ".irq" sufficient to prevent the execution of 
> twl specific
> > functions.
> 
> If PMIC is not TWL family, then I don't expect any functions in
> twl_common.c to be called.

This is the reason I wanted to know if the check on ".irq" in the
patch is sufficient. If any PMIC requires & sets "pmic_i2c_board_info.irq"
then both omap3_twl_init() and omap4_twl_init() will be called.

[quote]
 void __init omap_pmic_late_init(void)
 {
 	/* Init the OMAP TWL parameters (if PMIC has been registerd) */
 	if (!pmic_i2c_board_info.irq)
 		return;
 
 	omap3_twl_init();
 	omap4_twl_init();
 }
[/quote]

OR, is there something - beyond this patch that I may be missing.

~sanjeev

> 
> Kevin
>