Re: [PATCH v2 05/15] spi: Remove code duplication in spi_add_device_locked()

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 06:16:22PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 06:49:22PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Seems by unknown reason, probably some kind of mis-rebase,
> > the commit 0c79378c0199 ("spi: add ancillary device support")
> > adds a dozen of duplicating lines of code. Drop them.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/spi/spi.c | 11 -----------
> >  1 file changed, 11 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > index c99ee4164f11..46cbda383228 100644
> > --- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> > @@ -712,17 +712,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(spi_add_device);
> >  static int spi_add_device_locked(struct spi_device *spi)
> >  {
> >  	struct spi_controller *ctlr = spi->controller;
> > -	struct device *dev = ctlr->dev.parent;
> > -
> > -	/* Chipselects are numbered 0..max; validate. */
> > -	if (spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0) >= ctlr->num_chipselect) {
> > -		dev_err(dev, "cs%d >= max %d\n", spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0),
> > -			ctlr->num_chipselect);
> > -		return -EINVAL;
> > -	}
> > -
> > -	/* Set the bus ID string */
> > -	spi_dev_set_name(spi);
> 
> I see that this is duplicating spi_add_device() (and we really could do
> better with code sharing there I think) but I can't immediately see
> where the duplication that's intended to be elimiated is here - where
> else in the one call path that spi_add_device_locked() has would we do
> the above?  Based on the changelog I was expecting to see some
> duplicated code in the function itself.

Oh, by some reason Sebastian wasn't in this rather long Cc list.
Added him.

Reading again I don't see any useful explanation why that piece of code has to
be duplicated among these two functions. It's 100% a copy.

Sebastian, can you shed some light here?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko