Re: [PATCH] regulator: of: Lower the severity of the error with no container

From: Guenter Roeck
Date: Wed Oct 08 2014 - 20:25:50 EST

On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 01:12:13AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 05:05:55PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 12:45:41AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > definitely at least add a boot argument or something to suppress them,
> > > let me have a think if we want to do that by default.
> > It is a nuisance, so I might just disable it in our tree if we don't
> > find some other solution.
> We'll do something, just a question of what and what the default is.
Ok. Note that a boot parameter would not work well for our use case,
so it would be great if we can find something else.

> > Did you notice the problem with debugfs I had mentioned earlier ?
> > With all those regulators, not all of them being used, I end up with
> > many having the same name. This causes issues with debugfs, which is
> > trying to create the same file several times.
> > Any idea how we could solve this ? The constraints message is annoying,
> > but this one is a real issue.
> Shove a dev_name() on the front if we get a collision? I have to say
> I've never cared, the debugfs isn't that important so it doesn't matter
> too much if it fails.

Sure, but, again, I am getting lots and lots of those error messages.
I probably would not care either (and probably not even have noticed)
if not for those messages.

Want me to submit a patch with the dev_name solution ?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at