Re: [PATCH v3] rust: regulator: add a bare minimum regulator abstraction

[Alexandre Courbot]

On Sun May 18, 2025 at 9:17 PM JST, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 11:28:01AM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>
>> Alongside the `Enabled` and `Disabled` states, there would be a third
>> state (`Dynamic`?) in which the regulator could either be enabled or
>> disabled. This `Dynamic` state is the only one providing `enable` and
>> `disable` methods (as well as `is_enabled`) to change its operational
>> state without affecting its type.
>
> Note that checking is_enabled() is a red flag, it's only there for
> bootstrapping purposes as drivers are probing where there's some
> different sequence might be needed - the use cases are quite limited,
> most drivers shold just enable the regulator and initialise the
> device.

What things that are possible with the C API do you think should *not*
ever be done? That's typically around these kind of restrictions that
Rust abstractions should be designed, so you cannot end up in any
undesired state no matter what sequence of methods you call.