[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <524B17ED.1080806@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 12:43:57 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
CC: Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Guan Xuetao <gxt@...c.pku.edu.cn>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
openezx-devel@...ts.openezx.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] pwm-backlight: Use an optional power supply
On 09/23/2013 03:41 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> Many backlights require a power supply to work properly. This commit
> uses a power-supply regulator, if available, to power up and power down
> the panel.
I think that all backlights require a power supply, albeit the supply
may not be SW-controllable. Hence, shouldn't the regulator be mandatory
in the binding, yet the driver be defensively coded such that if one
isn't specified, the driver continues to work?
> diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c b/drivers/video/backlight/pwm_bl.c
> @@ -253,6 +264,16 @@ static int pwm_backlight_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
> }
>
> + pb->power_supply = devm_regulator_get_optional(&pdev->dev, "power");
... so I think that should be devm_regulator_get(), since the regulator
isn't really optional.
> + if (IS_ERR(pb->power_supply)) {
> + if (PTR_ERR(pb->power_supply) != -ENODEV) {
> + ret = PTR_ERR(pb->power_supply);
> + goto err_gpio;
> + }
> +
> + pb->power_supply = NULL;
If devm_regulator_get_optional() returns an error value or a valid
value, then I don't think that this driver should transmute error values
into NULL; NULL might be a perfectly valid regulator value. Related, I
think the if (pb->power_supply) tests should be replaced with if
(!IS_ERR(pb->power_supply)) instead.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists