[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <95ae81a3-4800-4598-a910-31c27d543b06@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 10:55:00 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
Cc: Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>,
Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] rust: regulator: add a bare minimum regulator
abstraction
On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 09:51:33PM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Sun May 18, 2025 at 9:20 PM JST, Mark Brown wrote:
> > It's so that if you have multiple logical users within the device (eg,
> > an interrupt handler and code for normal operation) they can work
> > independently of each other. You could also request the regulator
> > multiple times but that's often not idiomatic.
> I guess this means that we want to preserve this use-case with Rust as
> well?
Perhaps. It might be that the multiple requests approach is more
idiomatic in rust than it is un C.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists