Hi,
On 3/29/21 12:52 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> +Cc: Hans (just for your opinion)
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 10:40 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 28, 2021, Mugilraj Dhavachelvan <dmugil2000@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> As per linux kernel coding style braces are not needed for single
>>> statement.
>>> Checkpatch
>>> warning: braces {} are not necessary for any arm of this statement
>>> 128: FILE: drivers/iio/accel/da280.c:128:
>>>
>>
>> While it’s the correct patch, I would rather recommend making the driver non-ACPI centric. I.e.:
>> - replace that custom function by device_get_match_data() call
>>
>> - replace that condition by something like
>> type = device_get_match_data();
>>
>> - drop ACPI_PTR()
>>
>> - replace acpi.h by mod_devicetable.h and property.h
>>
>> - convert to use ->probe_new()
>>
>>
>> Everything, except the last one is in one patch, the last one is another patch.
I agree that *carefully* converting to driver to device_get_match_data() would be good.
Regards,
Hans
>>
>>
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mugilraj Dhavachelvan <dmugil2000@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iio/accel/da280.c | 5 ++---
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c b/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c
>>> index 227bea2d738b..31f290ae4386 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c
>>> @@ -125,11 +125,10 @@ static int da280_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>> indio_dev->modes = INDIO_DIRECT_MODE;
>>> indio_dev->channels = da280_channels;
>>>
>>> - if (ACPI_HANDLE(&client->dev)) {
>>> + if (ACPI_HANDLE(&client->dev))
>>> chip = da280_match_acpi_device(&client->dev);
>>> - } else {
>>> + else
>>> chip = id->driver_data;
>>> - }
>>>
>>> if (chip == da226) {
>>> indio_dev->name = "da226";
>
