[PATCH] mfd: rn5t618: cleanup i2c_device_id

[PATCH] mfd: rn5t618: cleanup i2c_device_id

[Andreas Kemnade]

That list was just empty, so it can be removed if .probe_new
instead of .probe is used

Suggested-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
---
 drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 11 ++---------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
index 18d56a732b20..70d52b46ee8a 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
@@ -150,8 +150,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id rn5t618_of_match[] = {
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rn5t618_of_match);
 
-static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
-			     const struct i2c_device_id *id)
+static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
 {
 	const struct of_device_id *of_id;
 	struct rn5t618 *priv;
@@ -251,11 +250,6 @@ static int __maybe_unused rn5t618_i2c_resume(struct device *dev)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static const struct i2c_device_id rn5t618_i2c_id[] = {
-	{ }
-};
-MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, rn5t618_i2c_id);
-
 static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(rn5t618_i2c_dev_pm_ops,
 			rn5t618_i2c_suspend,
 			rn5t618_i2c_resume);
@@ -266,9 +260,8 @@ static struct i2c_driver rn5t618_i2c_driver = {
 		.of_match_table = of_match_ptr(rn5t618_of_match),
 		.pm = &rn5t618_i2c_dev_pm_ops,
 	},
-	.probe = rn5t618_i2c_probe,
+	.probe_new = rn5t618_i2c_probe,
 	.remove = rn5t618_i2c_remove,
-	.id_table = rn5t618_i2c_id,
 };
 
 module_i2c_driver(rn5t618_i2c_driver);
-- 
2.20.1

Re: [PATCH] mfd: rn5t618: cleanup i2c_device_id

[Andreas Kemnade]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1587 bytes --]

Hi,

just re-checking the patch again. Seems that I have added it on top of my RTC
series. It breaks because of...

On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 22:57:31 +0100
Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> wrote:

> That list was just empty, so it can be removed if .probe_new
> instead of .probe is used
> 
> Suggested-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> ---
>  drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 11 ++---------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> index 18d56a732b20..70d52b46ee8a 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> @@ -150,8 +150,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id rn5t618_of_match[] = {
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rn5t618_of_match);
>  
> -static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
> -			     const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> +static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
>  {
>  	const struct of_device_id *of_id;
>  	struct rn5t618 *priv;
> @@ -251,11 +250,6 @@ static int __maybe_unused rn5t618_i2c_resume(struct device *dev)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
I added the pm stuff above ...


> -static const struct i2c_device_id rn5t618_i2c_id[] = {
> -	{ }
> -};
> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, rn5t618_i2c_id);
> -

and below it in my RTC series.

>  static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(rn5t618_i2c_dev_pm_ops,
>  			rn5t618_i2c_suspend,
>  			rn5t618_i2c_resume);

Do you want to have it rebased so it can be applied first?
Sorry for the confusion here.

Regards,
Andreas

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] mfd: rn5t618: cleanup i2c_device_id

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, Andreas Kemnade wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> just re-checking the patch again. Seems that I have added it on top of my RTC
> series. It breaks because of...
> 
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 22:57:31 +0100
> Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> wrote:
> 
> > That list was just empty, so it can be removed if .probe_new
> > instead of .probe is used
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 11 ++---------
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > index 18d56a732b20..70d52b46ee8a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > @@ -150,8 +150,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id rn5t618_of_match[] = {
> >  };
> >  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rn5t618_of_match);
> >  
> > -static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
> > -			     const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> > +static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
> >  {
> >  	const struct of_device_id *of_id;
> >  	struct rn5t618 *priv;
> > @@ -251,11 +250,6 @@ static int __maybe_unused rn5t618_i2c_resume(struct device *dev)
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> I added the pm stuff above ...
> 
> 
> > -static const struct i2c_device_id rn5t618_i2c_id[] = {
> > -	{ }
> > -};
> > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, rn5t618_i2c_id);
> > -
> 
> and below it in my RTC series.
> 
> >  static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(rn5t618_i2c_dev_pm_ops,
> >  			rn5t618_i2c_suspend,
> >  			rn5t618_i2c_resume);
> 
> Do you want to have it rebased so it can be applied first?
> Sorry for the confusion here.

You may as well wait until -rc1 is out and rebase on top of that.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: [PATCH] mfd: rn5t618: cleanup i2c_device_id

[Andreas Kemnade]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2423 bytes --]

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 15:24:28 +0000
Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > just re-checking the patch again. Seems that I have added it on top of my RTC
> > series. It breaks because of...
> > 
> > On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 22:57:31 +0100
> > Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> wrote:
> >   
> > > That list was just empty, so it can be removed if .probe_new
> > > instead of .probe is used
> > > 
> > > Suggested-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c | 11 ++---------
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > index 18d56a732b20..70d52b46ee8a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/rn5t618.c
> > > @@ -150,8 +150,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id rn5t618_of_match[] = {
> > >  };
> > >  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rn5t618_of_match);
> > >  
> > > -static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
> > > -			     const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> > > +static int rn5t618_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
> > >  {
> > >  	const struct of_device_id *of_id;
> > >  	struct rn5t618 *priv;
> > > @@ -251,11 +250,6 @@ static int __maybe_unused rn5t618_i2c_resume(struct device *dev)
> > >  	return 0;
> > >  }
> > >    
> > I added the pm stuff above ...
> > 
> >   
> > > -static const struct i2c_device_id rn5t618_i2c_id[] = {
> > > -	{ }
> > > -};
> > > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, rn5t618_i2c_id);
> > > -  
> > 
> > and below it in my RTC series.
> >   
> > >  static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(rn5t618_i2c_dev_pm_ops,
> > >  			rn5t618_i2c_suspend,
> > >  			rn5t618_i2c_resume);  
> > 
> > Do you want to have it rebased so it can be applied first?
> > Sorry for the confusion here.  
> 
> You may as well wait until -rc1 is out and rebase on top of that.
> 
hmm, then the RTC/IRQ series does not apply on top of it:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191220122416.31881-1-andreas@kemnade.info/

and needs to be rebased. I have no idea if that is more favorable for you.
The RTC/IRQ series happily applies on top of v5.6-rc1, but not on top of
this patch.

Yes, I should have documented that apply-conflict, but was
not aware of it while submitting this patch.

Regards,
Andreas

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]