From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1750940AbbCSEJh (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:09:37 -0400
Received: from mail-ig0-f179.google.com ([209.85.213.179]:38556 "EHLO
	mail-ig0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750723AbbCSEJe (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:09:34 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPDyKFpG=q88QEkuAgoLqkZU40Kx7dB7PmnXHqEt0EtbYvR_Cg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1426112117-18220-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org>
	<1426112117-18220-2-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org>
	<CAPDyKFq_WMJfqNGuxwN7xPmhv2X6-+G1zXpdD6zYDkDe7-Jo2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD=FV=U-YnT5jF5MFC==hANXGPqVpV3iLMPu85TrQ4dNDsWeCA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPDyKFpG=q88QEkuAgoLqkZU40Kx7dB7PmnXHqEt0EtbYvR_Cg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:09:33 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 11vb8Qx-ZzyvuBQsqAVjYrKQQ1c
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=X=1=AnXCGgWWkJDcHLO-MfVqsSB2aJxi3WOgWJhD_ggA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] mmc: core: Add mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc()
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
        Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com>,
        Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@samsung.com>,
        Alexandru Stan <amstan@chromium.org>,
        Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
        Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>,
        Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@chromium.org>,
        Addy Ke <addy.ke@rock-chips.com>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@collabora.co.uk>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Chris Ball <chris@printf.net>, Johan Rudholm <johan.rudholm@axis.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Tim Kryger <tim.kryger@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Gabbasov <andrew_gabbasov@mentor.com>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Ulf,

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>> This will get us within .3V of whatever vmmc is.  If vmmc is 3.3V, it
>> will allow vqmmc of 3.0V - 3.6V.
>>
>> This _seems_ sane to me and given any sane system design we should be
>> fine here, I think.  I can't see someone designing a system where
>> vqmmc was not within .3V of vmmc, can you?  If we think someone will
>> actually build a system where vmmc is 3.3V and vqmmc can't go higher
>> than 2.7V then we'll either need to increase the tolerance here or add
>> a new asymmetric system call like my original patches did.
>
> I know about SoC that supports 3.4V vmmc and 2.9V vqmmc.
>
> What I think we need is the option to have a policy here. We need to
> allow voltage levels stated by the spec and at the same time try chose
> the one best suited. That's not being accomplished here.
>
> Moreover, I wonder whether it's okay (from spec perspective) to have
> vqmmc at a higher voltage level than vmmc. I don't think that's
> allowed, but I might be wrong.

OK, so sounds like I need to add a regulator_set_voltage_tol2()
function that takes in an upper tolerance and a lower.  We can use the
same rough implementation in the core we have today (if Mark is OK
with that) with regulator_set_voltage_tol() but just allow it to be
asymmetric.

>>From what I see in the spec for 3.3V cards are supposed to react to a
high signal that is .625 * VDD - VDD + .3


I might not be able to get to this till next week, though...

-Doug