On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 10:57:44AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 8:47 AM Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> wrote:

> > In fact it's the other way round - "optional" in this case is for when
> > the supply may legitimately not exist so the driver may or may not need
> > to handle it, so it can return -ENODEV if a regulator isn't described by
> > firmware. A non-optional regulator is assumed to represent a necessary
> > supply, so if there's nothing described by firmware you get the (valid)
> > dummy regulator back.

> Ah yes, regulators is the oddball. Surely no one else will assume the
> same behavior of _optional() variants across subsystems... ;)

It would be silly to copy the *whole* pattern!