On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 10:04:44PM +0300, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> Can this struct be renamed to arm_scmi_driver?
>
> чт, 30 июн. 2022 г. в 21:58, Sascha Hauer <sha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 09:19:40AM +0300, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Shiyan <eagle.alexander923@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 7 +------
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> > > index ef3d76b3f4..ad91a60e0c 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> > > @@ -1252,6 +1252,7 @@ static struct driver_d scmi_driver = {
> > > .of_compatible = scmi_of_match,
> > > .probe = scmi_probe,
> > > };
> > > +core_platform_driver(scmi_driver);
> >
> > Had to drop this one as well. The core_platform_driver macro expands
> > to an initcall named drv##_register which becomes scmi_driver_register,
> > but that function already exists in include/linux/scmi_protocol.h.
Did that. I considered adding some underscores to the function names in
register_driver_macro, but that would show up in the trace initcalls
functionality which doesn't make that output nicer.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
