Hi, On 12/31/23 19:34, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx> > > In general using ACPI_PTR() leads to more fragile code for a very > minor saving in storage in the case of !CONFIG_ACPI so in IIO we > prefer not to use it if the only ACPI specific code is the acpi_device_id > table. > > In this case will also suppress a unused variable warning. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202302142222.vVU0E4eu-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanks, patch looks good to me: Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> Regards, Hans > --- > drivers/iio/accel/da280.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c b/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c > index 572bfe9694b0..d792d2d20344 100644 > --- a/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c > +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/da280.c > @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, da280_i2c_id); > static struct i2c_driver da280_driver = { > .driver = { > .name = "da280", > - .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(da280_acpi_match), > + .acpi_match_table = da280_acpi_match, > .pm = pm_sleep_ptr(&da280_pm_ops), > }, > .probe = da280_probe,
