Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1474587

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: pwm: Add support for a fixed delay after duty cycle changes

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:21:15PM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:

> A change of the duty cycle doesn't necessarily cause an immediate switch
> to the target voltage.  On many PWM regulators there is a fixed "settle
> time" (irrespective of the jump size) that we need to wait after an
> upward jump.  This change introduces the device tree property
> "settle-time-up-us" which allows us to specify a fixed delay after a
> voltage increase.

Why is this specific to regulators implemented with PWM controllers?
Most DCDCs have a PWM element and the concept of a hard time limit for
transition rather than a ramp rate doesn't seem like it'd be unique.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: pwm: Add support for a fixed delay after duty cycle changes Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-08-31 06:30 +0200
  [PATCH v3 2/2] regulator: pwm: Prevent falling too fast Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-08-31 06:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] regulator: pwm: Prevent falling too fast Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-09-01 23:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: pwm: Add support for a fixed delay  after duty cycle changes Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-09-01 23:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: pwm: Add support for a fixed delay  after duty cycle changes Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2016-09-02 17:20 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] regulator: pwm: Add support for a fixed delay  after duty cycle changes Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2016-09-02 17:20 +0200

csiph-web