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: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 04:53:40PM +0200, megous@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Ondrej Jirman <megous@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > 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
