On 2021-08-13 15:32, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 03:01:10PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
Indeed I've thought before that it would be nice if regulators worked like
GPIOs, where the absence of an optional one does give you NULL, and most of
the API is also NULL-safe. Probably a pretty big job though...
It also encourages *really* bad practice with error handling, and in
general there are few use cases for optional regulators where there's
not some other actions that need to be taken in the case where the
supply isn't there (elimintating some operating points or features,
reconfiguring power internally and so on). If we genuninely don't need
to do anything special one wonders why we're trying to turn the power on
in the first place.
Sure, once you get into it, regulators are arguably a rather deeper area
than GPIOs, so in terms of the NULL-safe aspect anything beyond
enable/disable - for the sake of keeping trivial usage simple - would be
pretty questionable for sure.
A lot of the usage of regulator_get_optional() seems to be just making
sure some external thing is powered between probe() and remove() if it's
not hard-wired already, so maybe something like a
devm_regulator_get_optional_enabled() could be an answer to that
argument without even touching the underlying API.
Robin.
