On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 06:49:22PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Seems by unknown reason, probably some kind of mis-rebase,
> the commit 0c79378c0199 ("spi: add ancillary device support")
> adds a dozen of duplicating lines of code. Drop them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/spi/spi.c | 11 -----------
> 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> index c99ee4164f11..46cbda383228 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> @@ -712,17 +712,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(spi_add_device);
> static int spi_add_device_locked(struct spi_device *spi)
> {
> struct spi_controller *ctlr = spi->controller;
> - struct device *dev = ctlr->dev.parent;
> -
> - /* Chipselects are numbered 0..max; validate. */
> - if (spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0) >= ctlr->num_chipselect) {
> - dev_err(dev, "cs%d >= max %d\n", spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0),
> - ctlr->num_chipselect);
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> -
> - /* Set the bus ID string */
> - spi_dev_set_name(spi);
I see that this is duplicating spi_add_device() (and we really could do
better with code sharing there I think) but I can't immediately see
where the duplication that's intended to be elimiated is here - where
else in the one call path that spi_add_device_locked() has would we do
the above? Based on the changelog I was expecting to see some
duplicated code in the function itself.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
