On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 4:08 PM Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 11:41:52AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 7:32 PM Mark Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It really should be the actual physical state change that triggers the > > > event. > > > I guess so, but this would require some non-trivial rework of the > > regulator core. We'd need some list of deferred notifications stored > > in memory for when the physical state actually changes. > > I'm not sure I see the need for deferred notifications? We'd need to go > round all the users whenever a physical change to the GPIO happens but > it's not clear what we'd need to store beyond the list of users?
In my mind I was thinking that we only need to send the notifications to users who already enabled/disabled the regulator too but you're right, it seems like a loop over the relevant pins should be enough. In any case: this is outside the scope of this series but I'll see if it's easy enough to add separately. Bartosz
