On 30/03/16 18:32, Mark Brown wrote:
> When a regulator is in bypass mode it is functioning as a switch
> returning the voltage set in the regulator will not give the voltage
> being output by the regulator as it's just passing through its supply.
> This means that when we are getting the voltage from a regulator we
> should check to see if it is in bypass mode and if it is we should
> report the voltage from the supply rather than that which is set on the
> regulator.
>
> Reported-by: Jon Hunter <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> Completely untested.
>
> drivers/regulator/core.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> index 74e8a7a3b3e8..03042e450399 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
> @@ -3118,6 +3118,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(regulator_sync_voltage);
> static int _regulator_get_voltage(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> {
> int sel, ret;
> + bool bypassed;
> +
> + if (rdev->desc->ops->get_bypass) {
> + ret = rdev->desc->ops->get_bypass(rdev, &bypassed);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + if (bypassed) {
> + if (rdev->supply) {
> + ret =
> _regulator_get_voltage(rdev->supply->rdev);
Should this be a return here?
> + } else {
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + }
> + }
>
> if (rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage_sel) {
> sel = rdev->desc->ops->get_voltage_sel(rdev);
>
I gave this a quick test on tegra124 having populated the
get/set_bypass() operators for the as3722. In this case, there is still
a problem because _regulator_get_voltage() is called during regulator
registration when set_machine_constraints() is called, which is before
we have called regulator_register_resolve_supply(). Therefore, it seems
to me that we still need to resolve the supply before we call
set_machine_constraints().
Jon
