Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: zynq: use module_platform_driver to simplify the code

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 12:08 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, April 9, 2021, Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> module_platform_driver() makes the code simpler by eliminating
>> boilerplate code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c | 17 +----------------
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> index 3521c1dc3ac0..bb1ac0c5cf26 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> @@ -1020,22 +1020,7 @@ static struct platform_driver zynq_gpio_driver = {
>>         .remove = zynq_gpio_remove,
>>  };
>>
>> -/**
>> - * zynq_gpio_init - Initial driver registration call
>> - *
>> - * Return: value from platform_driver_register
>> - */
>> -static int __init zynq_gpio_init(void)
>> -{
>> -       return platform_driver_register(&zynq_gpio_driver);
>> -}
>> -postcore_initcall(zynq_gpio_init);
>
>
>
> It’s not an equivalent. Have you tested on actual hardware? If no, there is no go for this change.
>

Yep, this has been like this since the initial introduction of this
driver. Unfortunately there's no documented reason so unless we can
test it, it has to stay this way.

Bartosz




[Index of Archives]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux