Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] regulator: core: Disable unused regulators with unknown status

[Bjorn Andersson]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 01:09:11PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 04:17:17PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> 
> > Instead of -EINVAL we could also use a different return code to indicate
> > the initial status is unknown. Or maybe there is some other option that
> > would be easier? This is working for me but I'm sending it as RFC to get
> > more feedback. :)
> 
> The more normal thing here would be -EBUSY I think - -EINVAL kind of
> indicates that the operation will never work while in reality it could
> possibly work in future.  Though for the RPMH it's not really the case
> that it ever supports readback, what it does is have it's own reference
> counting in the driver.  Rather than doing this we should probably have
> logic in the core which sees that the driver has a write operation but
> no read operation and implements appropriate behaviour.

I like the suggestion to not implement is_enabled, and handle that in
the core instead, for all three generations of our rpm-based regulators.

Regards,
Bjorn