lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/2] misc: Add power-efuse driver
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:23:44AM PST, Zev Weiss wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 11:07:57PM PST, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(under_voltage, REGULATOR_ERROR_UNDER_VOLTAGE);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_current, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(regulation_out, REGULATOR_ERROR_REGULATION_OUT);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(fail, REGULATOR_ERROR_FAIL);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_temp, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_TEMP);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(under_voltage_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_UNDER_VOLTAGE_WARN);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_current_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT_WARN);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_voltage_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_VOLTAGE_WARN);
>>>+EFUSE_ERROR_ATTR(over_temp_warn, REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_TEMP_WARN);
>>>+
>>>+static struct attribute *efuse_attrs[] = {
>>>+ &dev_attr_operstate.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_under_voltage.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_over_current.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_regulation_out.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_fail.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_over_temp.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_under_voltage_warn.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_over_current_warn.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_over_voltage_warn.attr,
>>>+ &dev_attr_over_temp_warn.attr,
>>>+ NULL,
>>>+};
>>>+ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efuse);
>>
>>Shouldn't these all just be what all regulator drivers report? Or power
>>drivers? I find it odd that this would be the first driver that would
>>need to export these types of attributes. Surely there's already a
>>class for this?
>>
>
>The attributes available from the underlying regulator device don't
>include the error flags, and while they do include its state
>('operstate' here), it's a read-only attribute, and from previous
>discussions with Mark I gathered that was unlikely to change (whereas
>it being read-write is a critical part of this driver's
>functionality).
>
>Given his input on the first stab at this I took a while back, I've
>been hoping to hear from Mark as to whether this looked more like
>something he'd find palatable; perhaps he could chime in on this too?
>(And/or on the regulator API question in the cover letter.)
>

Ping...Mark (or Liam?), any thoughts on an appropriate path forward on
this?


Thanks,
Zev

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-04-12 00:10    [W:0.076 / U:0.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site