lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Regulator probe on demand (or circular dependencies)
From
Date
Hi Mark,

Thanks for getting back to me,

On 09/12/2019 16:37, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 04:38:04PM +0000, Kieran Bingham wrote:
>
>> The MAX9286 also exposes 2 GPIO pins, as such I have configured the
>> MAX9286 driver [1] to expose a gpio-chip [2].
>
> So this seems like a MFD then? The nice thing about using the MFD
> subsystem is that it means that the drivers for the various subsystems
> on the device can instantiate in any order and defer separately without
> interfering with each other which seems like it's the issue here.

Well that's part of the problem... the V4L2 async framework can not
currently support the device performing a probe-defer at all, so it
*will* fail later (and crash currently).

I hope we can fix this sometime - but it's a recurring pain point it
seems. Unless it's just our video-capture driver, I'll have to dig
deeper here, and check with Niklas.


>> - is there anything I can do here within regulator_dev_lookup() to
>> attempt creating the regulator_dev 'on-demand' when
>> of_find_regulator_by_node(node) returns empty? (or is that crazy, and
>> just a rabbit-hole?)
>
> This seems like a terrible idea, you'll have a half baked regulator in
> the system which will need special casing all over the place and
> doubtless be an ongoing source of bugs.

Thanks - that's essentially what I'm glad to hear /before/ going down
some rabbit hole. I'll re-evaluate with the team, and see what the next
best steps are.

--
Regards
--
Kieran

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-09 18:05    [W:0.079 / U:15.828 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site