[PATCH] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: Use devm_regulator_get_optional()

[PATCH] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: Use devm_regulator_get_optional()

[Mark Brown]

From: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>

Since the cpufreq-cpu0 driver is capable of coping without a software
controllable regulator and would be confused by a dummy one it should
use devm_regulator_get_optional() to ensure no dummy is provided.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>
---

devm_regulator_get_optional() is a new API in my tree for -next, is it
OK to merge this patch via that branch?

 drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
index 09cd3a7..b946ac7 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
@@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ static int cpu0_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	cpu_dev = &pdev->dev;
 	cpu_dev->of_node = np;
 
-	cpu_reg = devm_regulator_get(cpu_dev, "cpu0");
+	cpu_reg = devm_regulator_get_optional(cpu_dev, "cpu0");
 	if (IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) {
 		/*
 		 * If cpu0 regulator supply node is present, but regulator is
-- 
1.8.4.rc1

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: Use devm_regulator_get_optional()

[Viresh Kumar]

On 9 August 2013 23:38, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>
>
> Since the cpufreq-cpu0 driver is capable of coping without a software
> controllable regulator and would be confused by a dummy one it should
> use devm_regulator_get_optional() to ensure no dummy is provided.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>
> ---
>
> devm_regulator_get_optional() is a new API in my tree for -next, is it
> OK to merge this patch via that branch?

I don't see a issue with it, by Rafael has the authority :)

Over that it would have been useful if we could have this patch as part
of the series you posted for defining devm_regulator_get_optional(),
and so we could have seen what's that patch is doing..

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: Use devm_regulator_get_optional()

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 337 bytes --]

On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:52:00AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:

> Over that it would have been useful if we could have this patch as part
> of the series you posted for defining devm_regulator_get_optional(),
> and so we could have seen what's that patch is doing..

It's in -next.  There's rather a lot of regulator users in the kernel.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: Use devm_regulator_get_optional()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, August 09, 2013 07:08:03 PM Mark Brown wrote:
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>
> 
> Since the cpufreq-cpu0 driver is capable of coping without a software
> controllable regulator and would be confused by a dummy one it should
> use devm_regulator_get_optional() to ensure no dummy is provided.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@linaro.org>
> ---
> 
> devm_regulator_get_optional() is a new API in my tree for -next, is it
> OK to merge this patch via that branch?

Sure, please go ahead.

Thanks,
Rafael


>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
> index 09cd3a7..b946ac7 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c
> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ static int cpu0_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	cpu_dev = &pdev->dev;
>  	cpu_dev->of_node = np;
>  
> -	cpu_reg = devm_regulator_get(cpu_dev, "cpu0");
> +	cpu_reg = devm_regulator_get_optional(cpu_dev, "cpu0");
>  	if (IS_ERR(cpu_reg)) {
>  		/*
>  		 * If cpu0 regulator supply node is present, but regulator is
> 
-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.