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

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.