On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 05:47:14PM +0200, Ondřej Jirman wrote:

Hi Andrew,

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 05:39:39PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 04:53:40PM +0200, megous@megous.com wrote:

quoted

From: Ondrej Jirman <redacted>

Use devm_regulator_get instead of devm_regulator_get_optional and rely
on dummy supply. This avoids NULL checks before regulator_enable/disable
calls.

Hi Ondrej

What do you mean by a dummy supply? I'm just trying to make sure you
are not breaking backwards compatibility.

Sorry, I mean dummy regulator. See:

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/regulator/core.c#L1874

On systems that use DT (i.e. have_full_constraints() == true), when the
regulator is not found (ENODEV, not specified in DT), regulator_get will return
a fake dummy regulator that can be enabled/disabled, but doesn't do anything
real.

Hi Ondrej

But we also gain a new warning:

	dev_warn(dev,
		 "%s supply %s not found, using dummy regulator\n",
	         devname, id);

This regulator is clearly optional, so there should not be a warning.

Maybe you can add a new get_type, OPTIONAL_GET, which does not issue
the warning, but does give back a dummy regulator.

Thanks
	Andrew

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel