On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 05:43:17PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote:
>
> Where's the commit message body?
>
>> Signed-off-by: Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/mfd/viperboard.c | 1 -
>> include/linux/mfd/viperboard.h | 1 -
>> 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/viperboard.c b/drivers/mfd/viperboard.c
>> index 57fac1d..1e7c316 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/viperboard.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/viperboard.c
>> @@ -74,7 +74,6 @@ static int vprbrd_probe(struct usb_interface *interface,
>>
>> /* save our data pointer in this interface device */
>> usb_set_intfdata(interface, vb);
>> - dev_set_drvdata(&vb->pdev.dev, vb);
>
> This looks ok, as the subdrivers are accessing the driver data via the
> usb-interface (their parent) device.
>
> You verified that too, right?
Yes, I checked that the pdev field of struct vpbrd is not used in the
rest of the drivers.
>
>>
>> /* get version information, major first, minor then */
>> pipe = usb_rcvctrlpipe(vb->usb_dev, 0);
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/viperboard.h b/include/linux/mfd/viperboard.h
>> index af928d0..afc14ed 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mfd/viperboard.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/viperboard.h
>> @@ -104,7 +104,6 @@ struct vprbrd {
>> struct usb_device *usb_dev; /* the usb device for this device */
>> struct mutex lock;
>> u8 *buf;
>> - struct platform_device pdev;
>> };
>>
>> #endif /* __MFD_VIPERBOARD_H__ */
>
> Still feels like the kind of clean up that should have a Tested-by.
>
Unfortunately I do not have access to hardware to test.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
