Re: [PATCH V2 1/5] misc: eeprom: at24: Initialise AT24 NVMEM ID field

[Bartosz Golaszewski]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:14 PM Bartosz Golaszewski
<bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:50 AM Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > The AT24 EEPROM driver does not initialise the 'id' field of the
> > nvmem_config structure and because the entire structure is not
> > initialised, it ends up with a random value. This causes the NVMEM
> > driver to append the device 'devid' value to name of the NVMEM
> > device. Ideally for I2C devices such as the AT24 that already have a
> > unique name, we would not bother to append the 'devid'. However, given
> > that this has always been done for AT24 devices, we cannot remove the
> > 'devid' as this will change the name of the userspace sysfs node for
> > the NVMEM device. Nonetheless we should ensure that the 'id' field of
> > the nvmem_config structure is initialised so that there is no chance of
> > a random value causes problems in the future. Therefore, set the NVMEM
> > config.id to NVMEM_DEVID_AUTO for AT24 EEPROMs so that the 'devid' is
> > always appended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> > index e9df1ca251df..f76624b5c033 100644
> > --- a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> > +++ b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c
> > @@ -715,6 +715,7 @@ static int at24_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> >
> >         nvmem_config.name = dev_name(dev);
> >         nvmem_config.dev = dev;
> > +       nvmem_config.id = NVMEM_DEVID_AUTO;
> >         nvmem_config.read_only = !writable;
> >         nvmem_config.root_only = !(flags & AT24_FLAG_IRUGO);
> >         nvmem_config.owner = THIS_MODULE;
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
>
> Ha! I only now noticed I already have a patch for this in my tree from
> Vadym Kochan for this cycle. I'll drop this one.
>
> Bartosz

-ETOOEARLY, nevermind my comment, it's for a different issue. I queued
this for v5.10.

Thanks!
Bartosz