From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1icmdu-0002XB-Bs for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 08:37:47 +0000 Received: from gallifrey.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:5054:ff:fe8d:eefb] helo=[IPv6:::1]) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1icmds-0003JC-Ua for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2019 09:37:45 +0100 References: <1575380921-160915-1-git-send-email-s.riedmueller@phytec.de> <20191205080755.nc2ao3hjb5eli7ud@pengutronix.de> From: Ahmad Fatoum Message-ID: <67c1cd67-9156-9e43-2be4-b3502877d95f@pengutronix.de> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 09:37:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191205080755.nc2ao3hjb5eli7ud@pengutronix.de> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6qdl: phycore: Remove emmc vmmc-supply To: barebox@lists.infradead.org Hello, On 12/5/19 9:07 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 02:48:41PM +0100, Stefan Riedmueller wrote: >> There is no driver for the eMMC's vmmc-supply regulator in the barebox. >> Use a dummy regulator instead by simply deleting the vmmc-supply >> property. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Riedmueller >> --- >> arch/arm/dts/imx6qdl-phytec-phycore-som.dtsi | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/imx6qdl-phytec-phycore-som.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/imx6qdl-phytec-phycore-som.dtsi >> index 69f252b42382..974e271f453d 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/dts/imx6qdl-phytec-phycore-som.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/imx6qdl-phytec-phycore-som.dtsi >> @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ >> }; >> >> &usdhc4 { >> + /delete-property/ vmmc-supply; > > I don't like this approach very much. It's fine for barebox, but leads > to problems once you start Linux with the barebox device tree. I'd > rather go with the unmodified device trees (apart from the things > barebox changes to the device trees in order to start Linux). How about a barebox,regulator-always-on property? If the regulator is unnecessary, it basically means you can assume it's always on when barebox runs. If regulator_get is called with a property that points to such a node, a dummy regulator is returned with which enable is a no-op. Additionally, do the same for regulator-always-on, so the in-barebox device tree only needs to mark non regulator-always-on that are expected to be always on when it runs due to strapping/fuses as barebox,regulator-always-on. Thoughts? Ahmad -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox