On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:45 PM Srinivas Neeli <sneeli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > HI baratosz and Andy, > It's Bartosz. You literally just need to copy & paste the name from my email... > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 4:14 PM > > To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Srinivas Neeli <sneeli@xxxxxxxxxx>; linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx; Michal Simek > > <michals@xxxxxxxxxx>; Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhraj@xxxxxxxxxx>; Srinivas > > Goud <sgoud@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm- > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; git > > <git@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: zynq: use module_platform_driver to simplify > > the code > > > > 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. > > > I tested driver, functionality wise everything working fine. > Based on below conversation, I moved driver to module driver. > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/818202/ > Andy: How about we give it a try then? If anyone yells, we'll just revert it. > Thanks > Srinivas Neeli > > > Bartosz Bartosz