Re: [PATCH net-next v1 2/2] net: dsa: realtek: rtl83xx: add support for enabling supplies

Oleksij Rempel <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.drivers.devicetree,gmane.linux.network,gmane.linux.kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 08:51:53AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 6:26 AM Oleksij Rempel <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 07:40:29PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 5:56 PM Ahmad Fatoum <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > [Andrew says]
> > > > > static inline int __must_check clk_bulk_get_optional(struct device *dev,
> > > > > static inline int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get_optional(struct device *dev,
> > > > > static inline int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get_optional_enable(struct device *dev,
> > > > >
> > > > > If clk has them, maybe regulators should as well?
> > > >
> > > > clk and regulator have different interpretations of _optional
> > > > when encountering a non-existent resource:
> > > >
> > > > clk_get                 return error
> > > > clk_get_optional        return NULL
> > > > regulator_get           return handle dummy regulator
> > > > regulator_get_optional  return error code
> > > >
> > > > So devm_regulator_bulk_get() is already the "optional" variant, but it causes
> > > > all existing users to get dummy supply warnings.
> > >
> > > So is this a big problem? Does it cause any other issues than
> > > dmesg noise?
> >
> > As tested with local sashiko setup, new warnings for existing system
> > without good reason will be reported as regression, so it will be
> > blocker for net-next inclusion.
> 
> Strong reverse centaur (*) warning on this one.
> 
> I'm not sure this is how Mark want such "regressions" to be treated.
> 
> I think a few dummy supplies is just fine and it's rather that Sashiko
> need to be taught not to treat that as bugs/regressions.
> 
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
> 
> (*) Reverse centaur = humans touted to please AI, as opposed
> to AI helping humans, sarcastic term coined by author Cory Doctorow.

Without context, I would fully agree with this statement. But as some
one who need to adders new warnings on every kernel update for our
customers, I see the point of sashiko - new unnecessary warning
is extra unnecessary work for some one else == regression.

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.