Resending as plain text
On 08/18/2016 02:24 AM, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
If struct rmi_device_platform_data contains pointers to other struct,
it gets difficult to allocate a fixed size struct and copy it over between
drivers.
Change the pointers into a struct and change the code in rmi4 accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com>
---
this patch will conflict with Andrew's patch to switch hid-rmi
to use rmi4_core...
---
drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f11.c | 4 ++--
drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f12.c | 4 ++--
drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f30.c | 7 +++----
include/linux/rmi.h | 4 ++--
4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f11.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f11.c
index 20c7134..b14a7b6 100644
--- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f11.c
+++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f11.c
@@ -1063,8 +1063,8 @@ static int rmi_f11_initialize(struct rmi_function *fn)
rc = rmi_2d_sensor_of_probe(&fn->dev, &f11->sensor_pdata);
if (rc)
return rc;
- } else if (pdata->sensor_pdata) {
- f11->sensor_pdata = *pdata->sensor_pdata;
+ } else {
+ f11->sensor_pdata = pdata->sensor_pdata;
}
f11->rezero_wait_ms = f11->sensor_pdata.rezero_wait;
diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f12.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f12.c
index 332c02f..a631bed 100644
--- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f12.c
+++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f12.c
@@ -274,8 +274,8 @@ static int rmi_f12_probe(struct rmi_function *fn)
ret = rmi_2d_sensor_of_probe(&fn->dev, &f12->sensor_pdata);
if (ret)
return ret;
- } else if (pdata->sensor_pdata) {
- f12->sensor_pdata = *pdata->sensor_pdata;
+ } else {
+ f12->sensor_pdata = pdata->sensor_pdata;
}
ret = rmi_read_register_desc(rmi_dev, query_addr,
diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f30.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f30.c
index 760aff1..7990bb0 100644
--- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f30.c
+++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f30.c
@@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ static int rmi_f30_config(struct rmi_function *fn)
rmi_get_platform_data(fn->rmi_dev);
int error;
- if (pdata->f30_data && pdata->f30_data->disable) {
+ if (pdata && pdata->f30_data.disable) {
My one comment is that pdata struct is embedded in the transport device
so rmi_get_platform_data() will not return NULL. Making the check of
pdata unnecessary.
drv->clear_irq_bits(fn->rmi_dev, fn->irq_mask);
} else {
/* Write Control Register values back to device */
@@ -362,8 +362,7 @@ static inline int rmi_f30_initialize(struct rmi_function
*fn)
* f30->has_mech_mouse_btns, but I am
* not sure, so use only the pdata info
*/
- if (pdata->f30_data &&
- pdata->f30_data->buttonpad)
+ if (pdata && pdata->f30_data.buttonpad)
Same with this check of pdata.
break;
}
}
@@ -378,7 +377,7 @@ static int rmi_f30_probe(struct rmi_function *fn)
const struct rmi_device_platform_data *pdata =
rmi_get_platform_data(fn->rmi_dev);
- if (pdata->f30_data && pdata->f30_data->disable)
+ if (pdata && pdata->f30_data.disable)
And this one.
That's a fairly minor comment and I could see an argument for keeping
the checks in the event that the implementation of
rmi_get_platform_data() changes.
So:
Reviewed-by: Andrew Duggan <adug...@synaptics.com>
Andrew
return 0;
rc = rmi_f30_initialize(fn);
diff --git a/include/linux/rmi.h b/include/linux/rmi.h
index e0aca14..4a071e8 100644
--- a/include/linux/rmi.h
+++ b/include/linux/rmi.h
@@ -211,9 +211,9 @@ struct rmi_device_platform_data {
struct rmi_device_platform_data_spi spi_data;
/* function handler pdata */
- struct rmi_2d_sensor_platform_data *sensor_pdata;
+ struct rmi_2d_sensor_platform_data sensor_pdata;
struct rmi_f01_power_management power_management;
- struct rmi_f30_data *f30_data;
+ struct rmi_f30_data f30_data;
};
/**
