On 14.03.2025 08:45, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
> Hello Heiner,
>
> On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 20:45:06 +0100
> Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Since c909e68f8127 ("hwmon: (core) Use device name as a fallback in
>> devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info") we can simply provide NULL
>> as name argument.
>>
>> Note that neither priv->hwmon_name nor priv->hwmon_dev are used
>> outside tja11xx_hwmon_register.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c | 19 +++++--------------
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c b/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c
>> index 601094fe2..07e94a247 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c
>> @@ -87,8 +87,6 @@
>> #define TJA110X_RMII_MODE_REFCLK_IN BIT(0)
>>
>> struct tja11xx_priv {
>> - char *hwmon_name;
>> - struct device *hwmon_dev;
>> struct phy_device *phydev;
>> struct work_struct phy_register_work;
>> u32 flags;
>> @@ -508,19 +506,12 @@ static const struct hwmon_chip_info tja11xx_hwmon_chip_info = {
>> static int tja11xx_hwmon_register(struct phy_device *phydev,
>> struct tja11xx_priv *priv)
>> {
>> - struct device *dev = &phydev->mdio.dev;
>> -
>> - priv->hwmon_name = devm_hwmon_sanitize_name(dev, dev_name(dev));
>> - if (IS_ERR(priv->hwmon_name))
>> - return PTR_ERR(priv->hwmon_name);
>> -
>> - priv->hwmon_dev =
>> - devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(dev, priv->hwmon_name,
>> - phydev,
>> - &tja11xx_hwmon_chip_info,
>> - NULL);
>> + struct device *hdev, *dev = &phydev->mdio.dev;
>>
>> - return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(priv->hwmon_dev);
>> + hdev = devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(dev, NULL, phydev,
>> + &tja11xx_hwmon_chip_info,
>> + NULL);
>> + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(hdev);
>> }
>
> The change look correct to me, however I think you can go one step
> further and remove the field tja11xx_priv.hwmon_name as well as
> hwmon_dev.
>
This is part of the patch. Or what do you mean?
> One could argue that we can even remove tja11xx_hwmon_register()
> entirely
>
It's called from two places, and we would have to duplicate some things
like IS_ERR(). I think it's ok to leave this function in.
> Thanks,
>
> Maxime
Heiner
