Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) Add power control

[Wei Ni <wni@nvidia.com>]

On 09/10/2013 11:53 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 09/09/2013 08:40 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 09/09/2013 09:36 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On 09/09/2013 08:22 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
>>>> On 09/09/2013 11:50 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 02:50:22PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 04:34:43AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>>>>> On 09/09/2013 04:12 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 06:29:11PM +0800, Wei Ni wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This doesn't look good, it is going to ignore actual errors - I
>>>>>>>> *really*
>>>>>>>> doubt that vcc is optional, it looks like it's the main power
>>>>>>>> supply for
>>>>>>>> the device.  You should use normal regulator_get(), _optional() is
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> supplies which could physically not be provided in a system (eg,
>>>>>>>> if the
>>>>>>>> device can generate them internally if required).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then he'll have to make sure that all devicetree files in the system
>>>>>>> contain references to this regulator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or get the patches applied on top of the code that'll be going in this
>>>>>> cycle implementing get_optional() properly - when that's done the
>>>>>> default will be to provide a dummy supply for regulator_get().  If you
>>>>>> ack the patch I'd be happy to carry it.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Jean will have to ack it.
>>>>>
>>>> I think it's better to use get_optional(), and ignore the errors except
>>>> -EPROBE_DEFER. Because many platform may always power on this device,
>>>> and will not provide regulator for it, so if we get errors from
>>>> regulator subsystem and return it directly, then the probe() can't be
>>>> implemented, this driver can't work properly, even though it can work
>>>> without regulator support.
>>>> Mark, do you mean you have patches for regulator_get_optional() and
>>>> regulator_get()?
>>>>
>>>
>>> My understanding is that by adding regulator support you essentially
>>> committed to adding regulators (if necessary dummy ones) for this driver
>>> to all those platforms. This is quite similar to other drivers in the
>>> same situation. Once you start along that route, you'll have to go it
>>> all the way.
>>
>> By using regulator_get_optional(), the regulator should be optional,
>> hence you only have to add it to platforms that need it.
>>
> 
> Earlier comments suggest that this is not the intended use case for
> regulator_get_optional().

So I just need to use the regulator_get() instead, is it right?

> 
> Guenter
>