Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 02:09 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 01:18:23AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 01 April 2016 12:52 AM, Mark Brown wrote: So as per above, it will be adjusted to 13.75mV/us (nearest higher side) for device

Re: [PATCH] regulator: pwm: Try to avoid voltage error in duty cycle calculation

://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Laxman-Dewangan/regulator-pwm-Try-to-avoid-voltage-error-in-duty-cycle-calculation/20160331-220703 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git for-next config: i386-randconfig-a0-04010940 (attached as .config) reproduce: # save

Re: [PATCH] regulator: pwm: Try to avoid voltage error in duty cycle calculation

://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Laxman-Dewangan/regulator-pwm-Try-to-avoid-voltage-error-in-duty-cycle-calculation/20160331-220703 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git for-next config: i386-randconfig-a0-04010940 (attached as .config) reproduce: # save

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:52 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:29:05AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 01 April 2016 12:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: But here is the stuff without typo ;-) Device supports 5mV/us and 100mV/us which

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:52 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:29:05AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 01 April 2016 12:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: But here is the stuff without typo ;-) Device supports 5mV/us and 100mV/us which

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:09:18AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: The setting for observed value is not there for device configuration. Device support 5mV/us and 100mV/us. We observed 50mV/us when setting

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:09:18AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: The setting for observed value is not there for device configuration. Device support 5mV/us and 100mV/us. We observed 50mV/us when setting

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:15 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:01:19AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 01 April 2016 12:01 AM, Mark Brown wrote: So the PMIC actually has a setting for the rate you're seeing but for some resaon you can't

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:15 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 12:01:19AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 01 April 2016 12:01 AM, Mark Brown wrote: So the PMIC actually has a setting for the rate you're seeing but for some resaon you can't

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:01 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:17:38PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: HW and chip team did simulation with tegra and PMIC and found that the board needs more capacitance then what Vendor recommended for proper

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Friday 01 April 2016 12:01 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:17:38PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: HW and chip team did simulation with tegra and PMIC and found that the board needs more capacitance then what Vendor recommended for proper

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Thursday 31 March 2016 11:17 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:43:03PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: We need two properties, one what we measured in platform and second one for what we want to program PMIC. This is for the case where vendor

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Thursday 31 March 2016 11:17 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:43:03PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: We need two properties, one what we measured in platform and second one for what we want to program PMIC. This is for the case where vendor

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Thursday 31 March 2016 10:21 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:36:08PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 30 March 2016 11:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote: Like to add property as "regulator-device-ramp-delay" which will be use

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Thursday 31 March 2016 10:21 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:36:08PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 30 March 2016 11:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote: Like to add property as "regulator-device-ramp-delay" which will be use

[PATCH] regulator: pwm: Try to avoid voltage error in duty cycle calculation

)/155) = 100 and this is equivalent to 100mV and so final voltage is (80 + 10) = 90uV which is same as requested, Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> --- This is the rework on patch based on discuss

[PATCH] regulator: pwm: Try to avoid voltage error in duty cycle calculation

)/155) = 100 and this is equivalent to 100mV and so final voltage is (80 + 10) = 90uV which is same as requested, Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Cc: Lee Jones --- This is the rework on patch based on discussion in patch Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: pwm: Add support

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Wednesday 30 March 2016 11:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:59:07PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: Like to add property as "regulator-device-ramp-delay" which will be used for PMIC configuration and regulator-ramp-delay wi

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Wednesday 30 March 2016 11:46 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:59:07PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: Like to add property as "regulator-device-ramp-delay" which will be used for PMIC configuration and regulator-ramp-delay wi

[PATCH V10 0/6] Add support for MAXIM MAX77620/MAX20024 PMIC

/warning. Changes from V9: Use devm_regmap_add_irq_chip() and devm_gpiochip_add_data() Laxman Dewangan (6): mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024 mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024 pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024

[PATCH V10 0/6] Add support for MAXIM MAX77620/MAX20024 PMIC

/warning. Changes from V9: Use devm_regmap_add_irq_chip() and devm_gpiochip_add_data() Laxman Dewangan (6): mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024 mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024 pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024

[PATCH V10 1/6] mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024

The MAXIM PMIC MAX77620 and MAX20024 are power management IC which supports RTC, GPIO, DCDC/LDO regulators, interrupt, watchdog etc. Add DT binding document for the different functionality of this device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Acked-by: Rob Herr

[PATCH V10 1/6] mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024

The MAXIM PMIC MAX77620 and MAX20024 are power management IC which supports RTC, GPIO, DCDC/LDO regulators, interrupt, watchdog etc. Add DT binding document for the different functionality of this device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Acked-by: Rob Herring --- Changes from V1: - Added units

[PATCH V10 2/6] mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

of the device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Mallikarjun Kasoju <mkas...@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlow...@samsung.com> --- Changes from V1: - Code cleanups per review from V1. - Move register acccess APIs from header t

[PATCH V10 2/6] mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

of the device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Signed-off-by: Mallikarjun Kasoju Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski --- Changes from V1: - Code cleanups per review from V1. - Move register acccess APIs from header to c file. - Remove some of non required variable, remove duplication in error message

[PATCH V10 5/6] gpio: add DT binding doc for gpio of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to support these pins in GPIO mode via GPIO framework. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Acked-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.o

[PATCH V10 5/6] gpio: add DT binding doc for gpio of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to support these pins in GPIO mode via GPIO framework. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Acked-by: Rob Herring Acked-by: Linus Walleij --- Changes from V4

[PATCH V10 3/6] pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to configure pins in function mode as well as pin configuration parameters. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Acked-by: Rob Herr

[PATCH V10 6/6] gpio: max77620: add gpio driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

MAXIM Semiconductor's PMIC, MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins. It also supports interrupts from these pins. Add GPIO driver for these pins to control via GPIO APIs. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> --- Cha

[PATCH V10 4/6] pinctrl: max77620: add pincontrol driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> --- Changes from V1: - Cleanup code based on comment received on mfd/rtc. - Avoid duplication on error message. Changes form V2: - Run coccicheck and checkpatch in strict mode for t

[PATCH V10 3/6] pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to configure pins in function mode as well as pin configuration parameters. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Acked-by: Rob Herring Acked-by: Linus Walleij

[PATCH V10 6/6] gpio: max77620: add gpio driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

MAXIM Semiconductor's PMIC, MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins. It also supports interrupts from these pins. Add GPIO driver for these pins to control via GPIO APIs. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij --- Changes from V1: - Use the gpiochip_add_data and get the chip data

[PATCH V10 4/6] pinctrl: max77620: add pincontrol driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

-by: Laxman Dewangan Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij --- Changes from V1: - Cleanup code based on comment received on mfd/rtc. - Avoid duplication on error message. Changes form V2: - Run coccicheck and checkpatch in strict mode for the alignment. - update based on api changes from core. Changes

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Saturday 19 March 2016 02:05 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Saturday 19 March 2016 10:01 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> wrote: Generally the device driver should describe the PMIC and the device tree should de

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Saturday 19 March 2016 02:05 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Saturday 19 March 2016 10:01 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: Generally the device driver should describe the PMIC and the device tree should describe the board. So the Maxim's

Re: [PATCH 4/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog

On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:16 PM, Rob Herring wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 05:23:55PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On this case, we have already property "line-name" and passed the name of the gpio via this property. The property names is "line-name" which is good fo

Re: [PATCH 4/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog

On Thursday 17 March 2016 09:16 PM, Rob Herring wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 05:23:55PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On this case, we have already property "line-name" and passed the name of the gpio via this property. The property names is "line-name" which is good fo

Re: [PATCH V2 3/5] gpio: of: Return error if gpio hog configuration failed

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 07:42 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> wrote: If GPIO hog configuration failed while adding OF based gpiochip() then return the error instead of ignoring it. This helps of properly handling th

Re: [PATCH V2 3/5] gpio: of: Return error if gpio hog configuration failed

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 07:42 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: If GPIO hog configuration failed while adding OF based gpiochip() then return the error instead of ignoring it. This helps of properly handling the gpio driver dependency. When

Re: [PATCH V2 5/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 07:51 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> wrote: The child node for gpio hogs under gpio controller's node provide the mechanism to automatic GPIO request and configuration as part of the gpio-contro

Re: [PATCH V2 5/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 07:51 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: The child node for gpio hogs under gpio controller's node provide the mechanism to automatic GPIO request and configuration as part of the gpio-controller's driver probe function

Re: [GIT PULL] GPIO bulk changes for kernel v4.6

On Friday 18 March 2016 02:31 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: The end result should be clean but the history is a bit messy. Gaah.

Re: [GIT PULL] GPIO bulk changes for kernel v4.6

On Friday 18 March 2016 02:31 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: The end result should be clean but the history is a bit messy. Gaah. I took the tree, but I didn't realize just *how* messy it

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 08:18 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 07:11:23PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: So here we will need two parameters: advertised-ramp-delay for PMIC configurations and ramp-delay which is measured one. Most of time

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 08:18 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 07:11:23PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: So here we will need two parameters: advertised-ramp-delay for PMIC configurations and ramp-delay which is measured one. Most of time

Re: [GIT PULL] GPIO bulk changes for kernel v4.6

On Friday 18 March 2016 11:37 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: NOTE: tree was a bit dirty and I realized it too late: Laxmans devm_gpiochip_add() branch was based on my for-next branch rather than my devel branch, making

Re: [GIT PULL] GPIO bulk changes for kernel v4.6

On Friday 18 March 2016 11:37 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: NOTE: tree was a bit dirty and I realized it too late: Laxmans devm_gpiochip_add() branch was based on my for-next branch rather than my devel branch, making some commits appear twice

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Saturday 19 March 2016 10:01 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 10:05 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 09:05:26AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Saturday 19 March 2016 10:01 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:41 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 10:05 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 09:05:26AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March

Re: [PATCH] mfd: Fix MACRO for commonly declared MFD cell attributes

On Wednesday 16 March 2016 02:12 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Fri, 11 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 11 March 2016 02:09 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Wed, 09 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 06:38 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote

Re: [PATCH] mfd: Fix MACRO for commonly declared MFD cell attributes

On Wednesday 16 March 2016 02:12 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Fri, 11 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 11 March 2016 02:09 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Wed, 09 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 06:38 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Wednesday 02 March 2016 10:05 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 09:05:26AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 09:08 AM, Mark Brown wrote: You're not trying to scale the value here, you're trying to replace the value because

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: DT: Add support to scale ramp delay based on platform behavior

On Wednesday 02 March 2016 10:05 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 09:05:26AM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 09:08 AM, Mark Brown wrote: You're not trying to scale the value here, you're trying to replace the value because

Re: [PATCH 00/50] pinctrl: Add and use devm_ apis for pinctrl_{register, unregister}

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 02:01 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> wrote: Pushed the change at: Branch "devm_pinctrl_register" of https://github.com/ldewangan/linux-upstream.git. Base repo is for-next of https://gi

Re: [PATCH 00/50] pinctrl: Add and use devm_ apis for pinctrl_{register, unregister}

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 02:01 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:23 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: Pushed the change at: Branch "devm_pinctrl_register" of https://github.com/ldewangan/linux-upstream.git. Base repo is for-next of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/

Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: pwm: Add support for voltage linear equal steps

On Monday 14 March 2016 09:58 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 06:36:06PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:39 AM, Mark Brown wrote: I can't see any reason why this would ever be preferable to just using the flat linear

Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: pwm: Add support for voltage linear equal steps

On Monday 14 March 2016 09:58 PM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 06:36:06PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:39 AM, Mark Brown wrote: I can't see any reason why this would ever be preferable to just using the flat linear

Re: [PATCH V2 4/5] gpio: DT: Rephrase "gpios" of hog node to support multiple gpios

On Monday 14 March 2016 10:01 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: On 03/11/2016 06:43 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: The property "gpios" of GPIO hog node support the multiple GPIO entries. Rephrase the details of this property for this new support. Add details of new property "label"

Re: [PATCH V2 4/5] gpio: DT: Rephrase "gpios" of hog node to support multiple gpios

On Monday 14 March 2016 10:01 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: On 03/11/2016 06:43 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: The property "gpios" of GPIO hog node support the multiple GPIO entries. Rephrase the details of this property for this new support. Add details of new property "label"

[PATCH V2] regulator: pwm: Prints error number along with detail

Prints the error number along with error message when any error occurs. This help on getting the reason of failure quickly from log without any code instrument. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> --- This was part of the serie

[PATCH V2] regulator: pwm: Prints error number along with detail

Prints the error number along with error message when any error occurs. This help on getting the reason of failure quickly from log without any code instrument. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Cc: Lee Jones --- This was part of the series: regulator: pwm: Add supports for multiple instance

[PATCH V2] regulator: fixed: Remove workaround to handle of_get_named_gpio() return

Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> --- As per comment, it is said that patch is already posted. If the patch is active then please add my Tested-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Changes form V1: - Term WAR converted to waroaround. drivers/regulator/fixed.c | 14 ++ 1 fil

[PATCH V2] regulator: fixed: Remove workaround to handle of_get_named_gpio() return

Dewangan --- As per comment, it is said that patch is already posted. If the patch is active then please add my Tested-by: Laxman Dewangan Changes form V1: - Term WAR converted to waroaround. drivers/regulator/fixed.c | 14 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git

Re: [PATCH 3/5] regulator: pwm: Prints error number when it fails

On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:35 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 04:23:23PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: + dev_err(>dev, "Failed to get PWM, %d\n", ret); Pretty much everywhere else in the kernel we use "foo:

Re: [PATCH 3/5] regulator: pwm: Prints error number when it fails

On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:35 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 04:23:23PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: + dev_err(>dev, "Failed to get PWM, %d\n", ret); Pretty much everywhere else in the kernel we use "foo:

Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: pwm: Add support for voltage linear equal steps

On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:39 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 04:23:24PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: There is a use cases where entire voltage ranges from minimum to maximum is divided into n equal steps and just providing the steps count

Re: [PATCH 4/5] regulator: pwm: Add support for voltage linear equal steps

On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:39 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 04:23:24PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: There is a use cases where entire voltage ranges from minimum to maximum is divided into n equal steps and just providing the steps count

Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Remove WARs for handling of_get_named_gpio() return

On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:28 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 01:44:18PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 11 March 2016 10:00 AM, Mark Brown wrote: Remove the WAR implemented in fixed regulator to handle the return of of_get_named_gpio

Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Remove WARs for handling of_get_named_gpio() return

On Saturday 12 March 2016 11:28 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 01:44:18PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 11 March 2016 10:00 AM, Mark Brown wrote: Remove the WAR implemented in fixed regulator to handle the return of of_get_named_gpio

[PATCH V9 2/6] mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

of the device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Mallikarjun Kasoju <mkas...@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlow...@samsung.com> --- Changes from V1: - Code cleanups per review from V1. - Move register acccess APIs from header t

[PATCH V9 2/6] mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

of the device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Signed-off-by: Mallikarjun Kasoju Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski --- Changes from V1: - Code cleanups per review from V1. - Move register acccess APIs from header to c file. - Remove some of non required variable, remove duplication in error message

[PATCH V9 6/6] gpio: max77620: add gpio driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

MAXIM Semiconductor's PMIC, MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins. It also supports interrupts from these pins. Add GPIO driver for these pins to control via GPIO APIs. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> --- Cha

[PATCH V9 6/6] gpio: max77620: add gpio driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

MAXIM Semiconductor's PMIC, MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins. It also supports interrupts from these pins. Add GPIO driver for these pins to control via GPIO APIs. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij --- Changes from V1: - Use the gpiochip_add_data and get the chip data

[PATCH V9 1/6] mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024

The MAXIM PMIC MAX77620 and MAX20024 are power management IC which supports RTC, GPIO, DCDC/LDO regulators, interrupt, watchdog etc. Add DT binding document for the different functionality of this device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Acked-by: Rob Herr

[PATCH V9 0/6] Add support for MAXIM MAX77620/MAX20024 PMIC

/warning. Laxman Dewangan (6): mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024 mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024 pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024 pinctrl: max77620: add pincontrol driver for MAX77620/MAX20024 gpio: add DT

[PATCH V9 1/6] mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024

The MAXIM PMIC MAX77620 and MAX20024 are power management IC which supports RTC, GPIO, DCDC/LDO regulators, interrupt, watchdog etc. Add DT binding document for the different functionality of this device. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Acked-by: Rob Herring --- Changes from V1: - Added units

[PATCH V9 0/6] Add support for MAXIM MAX77620/MAX20024 PMIC

/warning. Laxman Dewangan (6): mfd: add device-tree binding doc for PMIC max77620/max20024 mfd: max77620: add core driver for MAX77620/MAX20024 pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024 pinctrl: max77620: add pincontrol driver for MAX77620/MAX20024 gpio: add DT

[PATCH V9 3/6] pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to configure pins in function mode as well as pin configuration parameters. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Acked-by: Rob Herr

[PATCH V9 4/6] pinctrl: max77620: add pincontrol driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> --- Changes from V1: - Cleanup code based on comment received on mfd/rtc. - Avoid duplication on error message. Changes form V2: - Run coccicheck and checkpatch in strict mode for t

[PATCH V9 5/6] gpio: add DT binding doc for gpio of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to support these pins in GPIO mode via GPIO framework. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Acked-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.o

[PATCH V9 5/6] gpio: add DT binding doc for gpio of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to support these pins in GPIO mode via GPIO framework. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Acked-by: Rob Herring Acked-by: Linus Walleij --- Changes from V4

[PATCH V9 3/6] pinctrl: add DT binding doc for pincontrol of PMIC max77620/max20024

Maxim Semiconductor's PMIC MAX77620/MAX20024 has 8 GPIO pins which act as GPIO as well as special function mode. Add DT binding document to configure pins in function mode as well as pin configuration parameters. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Acked-by: Rob Herring Acked-by: Linus Walleij

[PATCH V9 4/6] pinctrl: max77620: add pincontrol driver for MAX77620/MAX20024

-by: Laxman Dewangan Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij --- Changes from V1: - Cleanup code based on comment received on mfd/rtc. - Avoid duplication on error message. Changes form V2: - Run coccicheck and checkpatch in strict mode for the alignment. - update based on api changes from core. Changes

[PATCH V2 2/5] gpio: gpiolib: Print error number if gpio hog failed

Print the error number of GPIO hog failed during its configurations. This helps in identifying the failure without instrumenting the code. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> --- Changes from V1: - Keep originality of error message, just add the error number. - It make

[PATCH V2 5/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog

iple GPIOs in this property so that multiple GPIOs of gpio-controller can be configured by this mechanism with one child node. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Cc: Benoit Parrot <bpar...@ti.com> Cc: Alexandre Courbot <acour...@nvidia.com> --- Changes from V1: - Add &quo

[PATCH V2 2/5] gpio: gpiolib: Print error number if gpio hog failed

Print the error number of GPIO hog failed during its configurations. This helps in identifying the failure without instrumenting the code. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan --- Changes from V1: - Keep originality of error message, just add the error number. - It makes line to be >80 for str

[PATCH V2 5/5] gpio: of: Add support to have multiple gpios in gpio-hog

iple GPIOs in this property so that multiple GPIOs of gpio-controller can be configured by this mechanism with one child node. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Cc: Benoit Parrot Cc: Alexandre Courbot --- Changes from V1: - Add "labels" property for GPIO label names. --- drivers/gp

[PATCH V2 3/5] gpio: of: Return error if gpio hog configuration failed

is not ready at this time and gpio_request() for Tegra GPIO driver returns error. The error was not causing the Tegra GPIO driver to fail as the error was getting ignored. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Cc: Benoit Parrot <bpar...@ti.com> Cc: Alexandre Courbot <acou

[PATCH V2 3/5] gpio: of: Return error if gpio hog configuration failed

is not ready at this time and gpio_request() for Tegra GPIO driver returns error. The error was not causing the Tegra GPIO driver to fail as the error was getting ignored. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Cc: Benoit Parrot Cc: Alexandre Courbot Reviewed-by: Thierry Reding --- Changes from V1: - Add

[PATCH V2 1/5] gpio: of: Scan available child node for gpio-hog

Look for child node which are available when iterating for gpio hog node for request/set GPIO initial configuration during OF gpio chip registration. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Thierry Reding <tred...@nvidia.com> --- Changes from V1: - Add Th

[PATCH V2 1/5] gpio: of: Scan available child node for gpio-hog

Look for child node which are available when iterating for gpio hog node for request/set GPIO initial configuration during OF gpio chip registration. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan Reviewed-by: Thierry Reding --- Changes from V1: - Add Thierey's acks. --- drivers/gpio/gpiolib-of.c | 2 +- 1

[PATCH V2 4/5] gpio: DT: Rephrase "gpios" of hog node to support multiple gpios

The property "gpios" of GPIO hog node support the multiple GPIO entries. Rephrase the details of this property for this new support. Add details of new property "label" for GPIO label name. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@nvidia.com> --- Changes from V1:

[PATCH V2 4/5] gpio: DT: Rephrase "gpios" of hog node to support multiple gpios

The property "gpios" of GPIO hog node support the multiple GPIO entries. Rephrase the details of this property for this new support. Add details of new property "label" for GPIO label name. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan --- Changes from V1: - Add details for the

[PATCH V2 0/5] gpio: of: Add error handling and support for multiple gpio in gpio-hog

or message. - Collected acks/reviewed by. - Added label for name in gpio hog node. - Reseeunce to have dt doc before driver change. Laxman Dewangan (5): gpio: of: Scan available child node for gpio-hog gpio: gpiolib: Print error number if gpio hog failed gpio: of: Return error if gpio hog con

[PATCH V2 0/5] gpio: of: Add error handling and support for multiple gpio in gpio-hog

or message. - Collected acks/reviewed by. - Added label for name in gpio hog node. - Reseeunce to have dt doc before driver change. Laxman Dewangan (5): gpio: of: Scan available child node for gpio-hog gpio: gpiolib: Print error number if gpio hog failed gpio: of: Return error if gpio hog con

Re: [PATCH] mfd: Fix MACRO for commonly declared MFD cell attributes

On Friday 11 March 2016 02:09 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Wed, 09 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 06:38 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 26 February 2016 10:05 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote: Did you not see warnings like this when

Re: [PATCH] mfd: Fix MACRO for commonly declared MFD cell attributes

On Friday 11 March 2016 02:09 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Wed, 09 Mar 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Wednesday 02 March 2016 06:38 PM, Lee Jones wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Laxman Dewangan wrote: On Friday 26 February 2016 10:05 PM, Rhyland Klein wrote: Did you not see warnings like this when

Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Remove WARs for handling of_get_named_gpio() return

On Friday 11 March 2016 10:00 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 05:42:46PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: Remove the WAR implemented in fixed regulator to handle the return of of_get_named_gpio(). You need to explain what a WAR is, I suspect it's

Re: [PATCH] regulator: fixed: Remove WARs for handling of_get_named_gpio() return

On Friday 11 March 2016 10:00 AM, Mark Brown wrote: * PGP Signed by an unknown key On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 05:42:46PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: Remove the WAR implemented in fixed regulator to handle the return of of_get_named_gpio(). You need to explain what a WAR is, I suspect it's

[PATCH] regulator: of: Use of_property_read_u32() for reading min/max

OF interface provides to read the u32 value via standard interface of_property_read_u32(). Use this API to read "regulator-min-microvolts" and "regulator-max-microvolt". This will make consistent with other property value reads. Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewan...@n

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >