Messages in this thread | | | From | Alexandru Ardelean <> | Date | Fri, 21 May 2021 20:46:03 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpio-tps68470: remove platform_set_drvdata() + cleanup probe |
| |
On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 16:52, Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com> wrote: > > On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:41 AM Alexandru Ardelean > <aardelean@deviqon.com> 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. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <aardelean@deviqon.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c | 12 +----------- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c > > index f7f5f770e0fb..423b7bc30ae8 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-tps68470.c > > @@ -125,7 +125,6 @@ static const char *tps68470_names[TPS68470_N_GPIO] = { > > static int tps68470_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > { > > struct tps68470_gpio_data *tps68470_gpio; > > - int ret; > > > > tps68470_gpio = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*tps68470_gpio), > > GFP_KERNEL); > > @@ -146,16 +145,7 @@ static int tps68470_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > tps68470_gpio->gc.base = -1; > > tps68470_gpio->gc.parent = &pdev->dev; > > > > - ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &tps68470_gpio->gc, > > - tps68470_gpio); > > - if (ret < 0) { > > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to register gpio_chip: %d\n", ret); > > - return ret; > > - } > > - > > - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, tps68470_gpio); > > - > > - return ret; > > + return devm_gpiochip_add_data(&pdev->dev, &tps68470_gpio->gc, tps68470_gpio); > > } > > > > static struct platform_driver tps68470_gpio_driver = { > > -- > > 2.31.1 > > > > Applied. I got confused by the dev_get_drvdata() call earlier in probe > but this one's for the parent.
Yes. I initially got confused as well about it.
This pattern seems to be similar in other drivers as well; usually MFD devices.
> > Thanks, > Bart
| |