On Sat, 12 Aug 2023 16:08:38 +0100
Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Replace device_get_match_data()->i2c_get_match_data by making similar I2C
> and DT-based matching table to extend matching support for ID table.
>
> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Could have been a little clearer on the reasoning for doign this, but meh there
are a lot of them and this is moving things forwards.
Applied.
Thanks,
Jonathan
> ---
> drivers/iio/potentiometer/ad5110.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/potentiometer/ad5110.c b/drivers/iio/potentiometer/ad5110.c
> index 991e745c4f93..aaf02cc7aeba 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/potentiometer/ad5110.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/potentiometer/ad5110.c
> @@ -278,14 +278,19 @@ static const struct of_device_id ad5110_of_match[] = {
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, ad5110_of_match);
>
> +#define AD5110_ID_TABLE(_name, cfg) { \
> + .name = _name, \
> + .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)&ad5110_cfg[cfg], \
> +}
> +
> static const struct i2c_device_id ad5110_id[] = {
> - { "ad5110-10", AD5110_10 },
> - { "ad5110-80", AD5110_80 },
> - { "ad5112-05", AD5112_05 },
> - { "ad5112-10", AD5112_10 },
> - { "ad5112-80", AD5112_80 },
> - { "ad5114-10", AD5114_10 },
> - { "ad5114-80", AD5114_80 },
> + AD5110_ID_TABLE("ad5110-10", AD5110_10),
> + AD5110_ID_TABLE("ad5110-80", AD5110_80),
> + AD5110_ID_TABLE("ad5112-05", AD5112_05),
> + AD5110_ID_TABLE("ad5112-10", AD5112_10),
> + AD5110_ID_TABLE("ad5112-80", AD5112_80),
> + AD5110_ID_TABLE("ad5114-10", AD5114_10),
> + AD5110_ID_TABLE("ad5114-80", AD5114_80),
> { }
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, ad5110_id);
> @@ -305,7 +310,7 @@ static int ad5110_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> data->client = client;
> mutex_init(&data->lock);
> data->enable = 1;
> - data->cfg = device_get_match_data(dev);
> + data->cfg = i2c_get_match_data(client);
>
> /* refresh RDAC register with EEPROM */
> ret = ad5110_write(data, AD5110_RESET, 0);
