On Mon, 19 May 2014 17:18:38 +0100
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:25:56PM +0200, Alban Bedel wrote:
> 
> > Would checking that the regulator is at the voltage declared in the DT
> > better? Or should I just add a pseudo set method to the regulator driver
> > that only accept the current voltage? That could also be implemented at
> > the core level using a default method for all regulators that have a get
> > but no set method.
> 
> We already have code in the core to accept set_voltage() on fixed
> voltage regulators - are you sure you're working with current code?
> Otherwise fixing things to go through the standard set_voltage() path
> would be OK.  There should be no need to add a dummy function for
> setting.

The regulator_set_voltage() function do have code to handle such
read-only regulators. However the regulator init directly call the low
level function _regulator_do_set_voltage() which just error out when no
set method is available, hence my original patch.

Unless there is some better proposal, or objections, I'll submit a new
patch tomorrow to call _regulator_do_set_voltage() only if the current
voltage isn't correct.

Alban