On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:18:54 +0200 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/06/2024 10:57, Nuno Sá wrote: > > On Thu, 2024-06-06 at 16:26 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> Use spi_get_device_match_data() helper to simplify a bit the driver. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/iio/accel/adxl313_spi.c | 8 +------- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl313_spi.c b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl313_spi.c > >> index b7cc15678a2b..6f8d73f6e5a9 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/iio/accel/adxl313_spi.c > >> +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl313_spi.c > >> @@ -72,13 +72,7 @@ static int adxl313_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi) > >> if (ret) > >> return ret; > >> > >> - /* > >> - * Retrieves device specific data as a pointer to a > >> - * adxl313_chip_info structure > >> - */ > >> - chip_data = device_get_match_data(&spi->dev); > >> - if (!chip_data) > >> - chip_data = (const struct adxl313_chip_info > >> *)spi_get_device_id(spi)->driver_data; > >> + chip_data = spi_get_device_match_data(spi); > >> > > > > I understand you're sticking with the original code but since you're doing this, > > could we maybe add proper error checking for the call? Maybe Jonathan can even > > tweak that while applying... > > > > (same comment for patch 3) > > I consider that a separate patch/work, because it would have functional > impact. Agreed. Though error checking on these is normally paranoia / readability thing as we probed from some firmware match and all those entries are present, so it should just work. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
