On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 11:22:07AM +0300, Alexandru Ardelean wrote: > This assignment is the more peculiar of the bunch as it assigns the parent > of the platform-device's device (i.e. pdev->dev.parent) as the IIO device's > parent. > > It's unclear whether this is intentional or not. > Hence it is in it's own patch. Yeah, we have a few mfd drivers whose child drivers registers their class devices directly under the parent mfd device rather than the corresponding child platform device. Since it's done consistently I think you need to update them all if you really want to change this. And it may not be worth it since at least in theory someone could now be relying on this topology. > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/iio/light/lm3533-als.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/lm3533-als.c b/drivers/iio/light/lm3533-als.c > index bc196c212881..0f380ec8d30c 100644 > --- a/drivers/iio/light/lm3533-als.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/light/lm3533-als.c > @@ -852,7 +852,6 @@ static int lm3533_als_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > indio_dev->channels = lm3533_als_channels; > indio_dev->num_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(lm3533_als_channels); > indio_dev->name = dev_name(&pdev->dev); > - indio_dev->dev.parent = pdev->dev.parent; > indio_dev->modes = INDIO_DIRECT_MODE; > > als = iio_priv(indio_dev); Johan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
