Re: [PATCH] mfd: Switch two more drivers back to use struct i2c_driver::probe

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:01:16PM +0000, Sahin, Okan wrote:
> >Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 12:20 PM
> >To: Julien Panis <jpanis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sahin, Okan <Okan.Sahin@xxxxxxxxxx>; Lee
> >Jones <lee@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-
> >kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: [PATCH] mfd: Switch two more drivers back to use struct i2c_driver::probe
> >
> >[External]
> >
> >struct i2c_driver::probe_new is about to go away. Switch the driver to
> >use the probe callback with the same prototype.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >---
> > drivers/mfd/max77541.c    | 2 +-
> > drivers/mfd/tps6594-i2c.c | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/mfd/max77541.c b/drivers/mfd/max77541.c
> >index 4a3bad3493b3..e147e949c2b3 100644
> >--- a/drivers/mfd/max77541.c
> >+++ b/drivers/mfd/max77541.c
> >@@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ static struct i2c_driver max77541_driver = {
> > 		.name = "max77541",
> > 		.of_match_table = max77541_of_id,
> > 	},
> >-	.probe_new = max77541_probe,
> >+	.probe = max77541_probe,
> > 	.id_table = max77541_id,
> > };
> > module_i2c_driver(max77541_driver);
> >diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps6594-i2c.c b/drivers/mfd/tps6594-i2c.c
> >index 50a3cd03b3b0..899c88c0fe77 100644
> >--- a/drivers/mfd/tps6594-i2c.c
> >+++ b/drivers/mfd/tps6594-i2c.c
> >@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ static struct i2c_driver tps6594_i2c_driver = {
> > 		.name = "tps6594",
> > 		.of_match_table = tps6594_i2c_of_match_table,
> > 	},
> >-	.probe_new = tps6594_i2c_probe,
> >+	.probe = tps6594_i2c_probe,
> > };
> > module_i2c_driver(tps6594_i2c_driver);
> >
> >
> >base-commit: e0cbc202388af454eb771043b20db6dfe68199ec
> >--
> >2.39.2
> 
> Should I update the code then resend patch again? Or should I send another patch after merge is completed?

I'm not Lee, but I'll try an answer anyhow: Your patch is in next (via
Lee's tree) as commit e0cbc202388af454eb771043b20db6dfe68199ec. So I
guess Lee will keep the patch as is and send it to Linus. There is
nothing grave wrong, so no need to revert or rewrite the tree. I expect
Lee to just apply my patch on top of his tree.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature