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

[Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>]

On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 08:51:53AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 6:26 AM Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de> 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 <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de> 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 |