On Tuesday 16 February 2016 01:56:16 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 06:30:59AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> > - And so I left the regulator pointer to NULL in OPP core.
> > - But then I realized that its not safe to call many regulator core
> > APIs with NULL regulator, as those caused the crashes reported by
> > multiple people now.
> > - clk APIs guarantee that they return early when NULL clk is passed to
> > them.
> > - Do we need to do the same for regulator core as well ?
>
> No, NULL is explicitly not something you can substitute in,
> essentially all the users are just not bothering to implement error
> checking and we don't want to encourage that. The set of use cases
> where we legitimately have optional supplies is very small, much smaller
> than clocks, because it makes the electrical engineering a lot harder.
>
I must have misinterpreted the idea behind that API as well then.
>From this function definition:
/*
* Make sure client drivers will still build on systems with no software
* controllable voltage or current regulators.
*/
static inline struct regulator *__must_check regulator_get(struct device *dev,
const char *id)
{
/* Nothing except the stubbed out regulator API should be
* looking at the value except to check if it is an error
* value. Drivers are free to handle NULL specifically by
* skipping all regulator API calls, but they don't have to.
* Drivers which don't, should make sure they properly handle
* corner cases of the API, such as regulator_get_voltage()
* returning 0.
*/
return NULL;
}
my reading was that the expected behavior in any driver was:
* call regulator_get()
* if IS_ERR(), fail device probe function, never use invalid
pointer other than PTR_ERR()
* if NULL, and regulator is required, fail probe so we never
use the regulator
* if NULL, and regulators are optional, continue with the NULL
value.
* drivers never look into the regulator pointer, and only
pass it into regulator APIs which can cope with the NULL
value when CONFIG_REGULATOR is disabled.
That would be similar to what we have for clocks. Which part of
my interpretation is wrong?
Arnd
