Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1521762 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-11-14 16:50 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-11-15 18:40 +0100 |
| Articles | 4 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: pwm: DT: Add ramp delay for exponential voltage transition Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2016-11-14 16:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: pwm: DT: Add ramp delay for exponential voltage transition Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> - 2016-11-15 13:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: pwm: DT: Add ramp delay for exponential voltage transition Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2016-11-15 15:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: pwm: DT: Add ramp delay for exponential voltage transition Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> - 2016-11-15 18:40 +0100
| From | Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-14 16:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: pwm: DT: Add ramp delay for exponential voltage transition |
| Message-ID | <sDrG9-p6-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 11:07:54PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: > Some PWM regulator has the exponential transition in voltage change as > opposite to fixed slew-rate linear transition on other regulators. > For such PWM regulators, add the property for providing the delay > from DT node. > > Add DT binding details of the new property > "pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us" added for providing voltage > transition delay. > > Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> > CC: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > CC: Aleksandr Frid <afrid@nvidia.com> > > --- > This patch is continuation of discussion on patch > regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous mode > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9216857/ > where is it discussed to have separate property for PWM which has > exponential voltage transition. > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt > index 3aeba9f..a163f42 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt > @@ -54,6 +54,16 @@ Optional properties: > -------------------- > - enable-gpios: GPIO to use to enable/disable the regulator > > +- pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us: Integer, voltage ramp time in This is a really long name. Drop the 'pwm-regulator-' part as it is redundant. The fact that it is PWM reg specific is captured as it is documented that way. Rob
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-15 13:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sDKz7-4pA-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1521762 |
On Monday 14 November 2016 09:18 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 11:07:54PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> Some PWM regulator has the exponential transition in voltage change as >> opposite to fixed slew-rate linear transition on other regulators. >> For such PWM regulators, add the property for providing the delay >> from DT node. >> >> Add DT binding details of the new property >> "pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us" added for providing voltage >> transition delay. >> >> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> >> CC: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> >> CC: Aleksandr Frid <afrid@nvidia.com> >> >> --- >> This patch is continuation of discussion on patch >> regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous mode >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9216857/ >> where is it discussed to have separate property for PWM which has >> exponential voltage transition. >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt | 10 ++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt >> index 3aeba9f..a163f42 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt >> @@ -54,6 +54,16 @@ Optional properties: >> -------------------- >> - enable-gpios: GPIO to use to enable/disable the regulator >> >> +- pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us: Integer, voltage ramp time in > This is a really long name. Drop the 'pwm-regulator-' part as it is > redundant. The fact that it is PWM reg specific is captured as it is > documented that way. > We already have the regulator-ramp-delay from the regulator core. Just wanted to make this (pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us) for pwm specific. Can we have "pwm-regulator-ramp-delay" or "pwm-regulator-settling-time-us"?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-15 15:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sDMUh-65N-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1522610 |
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> wrote: > > On Monday 14 November 2016 09:18 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 11:07:54PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>> >>> Some PWM regulator has the exponential transition in voltage change as >>> opposite to fixed slew-rate linear transition on other regulators. >>> For such PWM regulators, add the property for providing the delay >>> from DT node. >>> >>> Add DT binding details of the new property >>> "pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us" added for providing voltage >>> transition delay. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> >>> CC: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> >>> CC: Aleksandr Frid <afrid@nvidia.com> >>> >>> --- >>> This patch is continuation of discussion on patch >>> regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous mode >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9216857/ >>> where is it discussed to have separate property for PWM which has >>> exponential voltage transition. >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt | 10 >>> ++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git >>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt >>> index 3aeba9f..a163f42 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/pwm-regulator.txt >>> @@ -54,6 +54,16 @@ Optional properties: >>> -------------------- >>> - enable-gpios: GPIO to use to enable/disable the >>> regulator >>> +- pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us: Integer, voltage ramp time in >> >> This is a really long name. Drop the 'pwm-regulator-' part as it is >> redundant. The fact that it is PWM reg specific is captured as it is >> documented that way. >> > > We already have the regulator-ramp-delay from the regulator core. > Just wanted to make this (pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us) for pwm > specific. Neither of these are very clear that one is linear and one is exponential. Maybe you should use the existing property to express the time and just add a boolean property like "voltage-ramp-exponential"? > Can we have "pwm-regulator-ramp-delay" or "pwm-regulator-settling-time-us"? How are those better? Same comment applies. Rob
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-15 18:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sDPSa-7Wd-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1522763 |
On Tuesday 15 November 2016 07:57 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com> wrote: >> On Monday 14 November 2016 09:18 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 11:07:54PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>> >>>> regulator >>>> +- pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us: Integer, voltage ramp time in >>> This is a really long name. Drop the 'pwm-regulator-' part as it is >>> redundant. The fact that it is PWM reg specific is captured as it is >>> documented that way. >>> >> We already have the regulator-ramp-delay from the regulator core. >> Just wanted to make this (pwm-regulator-voltage-ramp-time-us) for pwm >> specific. > Neither of these are very clear that one is linear and one is > exponential. Maybe you should use the existing property to express the > time and just add a boolean property like "voltage-ramp-exponential"? OK, this can work.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web