[PATCH v5 09/18] arm64: dts: qcom: qrb5165-rb5: model the PMU of the QCA6391

Bartosz Golaszewski brgl at bgdev.pl
Tue Feb 20 05:51:25 PST 2024


On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 2:48 PM Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 02:38:33PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 2:31 PM Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 12:16:10PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>
> > > > And what do you mean by there not being any consumers? The WLAN and BT
> > > > *are* the consumers.
>
> > > There are no drivers that bind to the regulators and vary the voltages
> > > at runtime.
>
> > Even with the above misunderstanding clarified: so what? DT is the
> > representation of hardware. There's nothing that obligates us to model
> > DT sources in drivers 1:1.
>
> It is generally a bad sign if there is a voltage range specified on a
> regulator that's not got any indication that the voltage is going to be
> actively managed, especially in situations like with several of the
> supplies the DT was specifying where there are clear indications that
> the supply is intended to be fixed voltage (or cases where every single
> supply has a voltage range which would be highly unusual).  Looking at
> the consumers might provide an explanation for such unusual and likely
> incorrect constraints, and the lack of any consumers in conjunction with
> other warning signs reenforces those warning signs.

What do you recommend? No values at all in these regulators as it's
the PMU which will manage those on its own once powered up by the host
PMIC?

Bartosz



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list