From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:59:25 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] simplefb: Add regulator handling support Message-Id: <5624A2DD.4020101@redhat.com> List-Id: References: <1444669458-5588-1-git-send-email-wens@csie.org> <561CAFE8.9080506@redhat.com> <20151014105556.GT14956@sirena.org.uk> <561E3D28.2090901@redhat.com> <20151018195719.GC14956@sirena.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20151018195719.GC14956@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hi, On 18-10-15 21:57, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:31:52PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> I like your idea in your other mail where you suggest to actually >> use foo-supply and bar-supply names in the simplefb node, and then have >> some code simple iterate over all the properties and check for *-supply >> properties, so that the proper, schematic matching names can be used. > >> But surely if we go this way having a helper for this so that others >> can re-use that likely not entirely trivial code is a good idea ? > > Yeah. It's trying to come up with a way to do this that is easy to > avoid abuse that's tricky. > >> One user which comes to mind immediately here is the generic mmc-pwrseq >> driver. > >> I agree that we need to be careful to not use a helper like this too >> much, but I do believe it will make sense to have it in some rare cases. >> We can put a big warning in both the header declaring it and above >> the implementation to use it scarcely. > > I'd rather have something that was visible in the code, not everyone > reads the documentation especially not subsystem maintainers reviewing > drivers that use APIs they're not familiar with. I'm afraid there is not really a good way to do this though, so a big fat warning in the header declaring the function is really the bets we can do IMHO. Regards, Hans