[PATCH] ASoC: cs42l51: improve error handling in cs42l51_remove()

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:31:56PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:58:39PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 07:38:08PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > Realistically you'd have to really be trying to trigger an error here
> > > and it's most likely that the system is in enough trouble if one is
> > > triggered that it's just not worrying about.  I'm not sure how likely
> > > it is that anyone would ever remove one of these devices in production
> > > though.
> 
> > So compared to my patch you'd just drop the warning?!
> 
> The warning is fine so long as there's no action on it but use regular
> regulator_bulk_disable() since as you youself said force disable is not
> appropriate here.

It's just the documentation of regulator_bulk_force_disable() that
irritates me. It's behaviour is exactly fine. If a user of several
regulators goes away, it should try to disable all regulators and if one
fails to disable it's better to the others instead of keeping all
enabled.

But I didn't feel strong enough to continue to argue, my focus is a
different one. Will send a v2 with keeping regulator_bulk_disable().

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/attachments/20211022/ec7ca1ad/attachment.sig>