On 7/20/2018 5:48 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:38:11PM +0800, Akshu Agrawal wrote:
static int cz_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { int ret; struct snd_soc_card *card; struct acp_platform_info *machine;
- static bool regulators_registered;
- if (!regulators_registered) {
ret = platform_device_register(&acp_da7219_regulator);if (ret) {dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to register regulator: %d\n",ret);return ret;}regulators_registered = true;- }
You should be unregistering the regulator in your remove function, not doing this hack here. I'd also expect to see the card made the parent of the device that gets registered.
This approach shows inconsistencies and in some boot cycles da7219 fails to get regulator. Form the logs (below) it shows time gap between the time we call “platform_device_register(&acp_da7219_regulator);” and when the regulator actually gets registered.
[ 12.594237] regulator registered **print after calling “platform_device_register(&acp_da7219_regulator);” ... [ 13.583689] da7219 i2c-DLGS7219:00: i2c-DLGS7219:00 supply VDD not found, using dummy regulator [ 13.593818] da7219 i2c-DLGS7219:00: i2c-DLGS7219:00 supply VDDMIC not found, using dummy regulator [ 13.603242] da7219 i2c-DLGS7219:00: i2c-DLGS7219:00 supply VDDIO not found, using dummy regulator [ 13.612626] da7219 i2c-DLGS7219:00: Invalid VDDIO voltage **Above DA7219 gets probed and does not find the regulator** ... [ 13.750894] reg_fixed_voltage_probe: Supply -> reg-fixed-1.8V [ 13.766746] reg-fixed-1.8V supplying 1800000uV **Regulator actually gets registered**
Alternate and consistent approach to this is pushed by Daniel here: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10539485/
Thanks, Akshu