Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpio-crystalcove: remove platform_set_drvdata() + cleanup probe

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>]

On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 12:32:26PM +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote:
> The platform_set_drvdata() call is only useful if we need to retrieve back
> the private information.
> Since the driver doesn't do that, it's not useful to have it.
> 
> If this is removed, we can also just do a direct return on
> devm_gpiochip_add_data(). We don't need to print that this call failed as
> there are other ways to log/see this during probe.

Pushed to my review and testing queue, thanks!

> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <aardelean@deviqon.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-crystalcove.c | 10 +---------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-crystalcove.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-crystalcove.c
> index 2ba225720086..5a909f3c79e8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-crystalcove.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-crystalcove.c
> @@ -339,8 +339,6 @@ static int crystalcove_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	if (!cg)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> -	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, cg);
> -
>  	mutex_init(&cg->buslock);
>  	cg->chip.label = KBUILD_MODNAME;
>  	cg->chip.direction_input = crystalcove_gpio_dir_in;
> @@ -372,13 +370,7 @@ static int crystalcove_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		return retval;
>  	}
>  
> -	retval = devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &cg->chip, cg);
> -	if (retval) {
> -		dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "add gpio chip error: %d\n", retval);
> -		return retval;
> -	}
> -
> -	return 0;
> +	return devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &cg->chip, cg);
>  }
>  
>  static struct platform_driver crystalcove_gpio_driver = {
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko