Re: [PATCHv7 10/11] mfd: as3722: Rid driver of superfluous I2C device ID structure

[Javier Martinez Canillas]

Hello Kieran,

On 11/07/2016 07:05 PM, Kieran Bingham wrote:
> Thanks for your reviews again Javier,
>

Thanks to you for keep pushing this series.

> On 07/11/16 19:20, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> Hello Kieran,
>>
>> On 11/07/2016 09:47 AM, Kieran Bingham wrote:
>>> From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Also remove unused second probe() parameter 'i2c_device_id'.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Changes since v4
>>>  - Rename .probe2 to probe_new
>>>
>>>  drivers/mfd/as3722.c | 12 ++----------
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/as3722.c b/drivers/mfd/as3722.c
>>> index f87342c211bc..7d8c5e4136e2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/as3722.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/as3722.c
>>> @@ -354,8 +354,7 @@ static int as3722_i2c_of_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
>>>  	return 0;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> -static int as3722_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c,
>>> -			const struct i2c_device_id *id)
>>> +static int as3722_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
>>>  {
>>
>> This is OK...
>>
>>>  	struct as3722 *as3722;
>>>  	unsigned long irq_flags;
>>> @@ -441,12 +440,6 @@ static const struct of_device_id as3722_of_match[] = {
>>>  };
>>>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, as3722_of_match);
>>>  
>>> -static const struct i2c_device_id as3722_i2c_id[] = {
>>> -	{ "as3722", 0 },
>>> -	{},
>>> -};
>>> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, as3722_i2c_id);
>>> -
>>
>> ... but I don't think this is correct. Otherwise you will break module
>> autoload for this driver since modpost needs the I2C device ID table
>> info to fill the i2c modalias in the drivers' module.
>>
>> Remember that i2c_device_uevent() always reports modalias of the form
>> MODALIAS=i2c:<foo> even when your series allows to match without a I2C
>> device ID table.
>>
> 
> Ok - Thanks for the reminder. I'll try to bear this in mind when we
> start updating drivers.
> 
> For now we can consider this patch dropped from the series I think.
>

Yes, or you could just do the change that uses probe_new for now but
leave the MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE().

>> Best regards,
>>
> 

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America