Re: [PATCH] Revert "platform/chrome: chromeos_laptop: Add Leon Touch"

[Olof Johansson]

On second thought, I went with the revert instead. Generating pull request now.


-Olof

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 4:07 AM, Enric Balletbo i Serra
> <enric.balletbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Benson, Olof
>>
>> On 26/05/16 03:59, Benson Leung wrote:
>>> This reverts commit bff3c624dc7261a084a4d25a0b09c3fb0fec872a.
>>>
>>> Board "Leon" is otherwise known as "Toshiba CB35" and we already have
>>> the entry that supports that board as of this commit :
>>> 963cb6f platform/chrome: chromeos_laptop - Add Toshiba CB35 Touch
>>>
>>> Remove this duplicate.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Benson Leung <bleung@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c | 15 ---------------
>>>  1 file changed, 15 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c
>>> index 8398a7d..e8a44a9 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/chromeos_laptop.c
>>> @@ -514,13 +514,6 @@ static struct chromeos_laptop cr48 = {
>>>       },
>>>  };
>>>
>>> -static struct chromeos_laptop leon = {
>>> -     .i2c_peripherals = {
>>> -             /* Touchpad. */
>>> -             { .add = setup_cyapa_tp, I2C_ADAPTER_DESIGNWARE_0 },
>>> -     },
>>> -};
>>> -
>>>  #define _CBDD(board_) \
>>>       .callback = chromeos_laptop_dmi_matched, \
>>>       .driver_data = (void *)&board_
>>> @@ -608,14 +601,6 @@ static struct dmi_system_id chromeos_laptop_dmi_table[] __initdata = {
>>>               },
>>>               _CBDD(cr48),
>>>       },
>>> -     {
>>> -             .ident = "Leon",
>>> -             .matches = {
>>> -                     DMI_MATCH(DMI_BIOS_VENDOR, "coreboot"),
>>> -                     DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Leon"),
>>> -             },
>>> -             _CBDD(leon),
>>> -     },
>>>       { }
>>>  };
>>>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(dmi, chromeos_laptop_dmi_table);
>>>
>>
>> I think my patch is not applied in mainline yet, I'm not sure if Olof has the patch in his working tree but in such case maybe he can simply remove the patch instead of apply and then revert it?
>>
>> Just an opinion, thanks.
>
> Yeah, good point. Done, even though it meant a full rebase right
> before I send the pull request. :-/
>
>
> -Olof