Re: [PATCH 567/606] staging: iio: ad5933: Convert to i2c's .probe_new()

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 14:35:34 +0100
Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hello Greg,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 11:45:01PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:  
> > > From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > .probe_new() doesn't get the i2c_device_id * parameter, so determine
> > > that explicitly in the probe function.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/staging/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.c | 6 +++---
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.c b/drivers/staging/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.c
> > > index f177b20f0f2d..b3152f7153fb 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/impedance-analyzer/ad5933.c
> > > @@ -674,9 +674,9 @@ static void ad5933_clk_disable(void *data)
> > >  	clk_disable_unprepare(st->mclk);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -static int ad5933_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > > -			const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> > > +static int ad5933_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> > >  {
> > > +	const struct i2c_device_id *id = i2c_client_get_device_id(client);  
> > 
> > Breaks the build in my tree as this function is not in Linus's tree yet
> > :(  
> 
> As pointed out in the cover letter[1] you want to make sure that
> 
> 	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wsa/linux.git i2c/client_device_id_helper-immutable
> 
> is part of your tree first. So either pull that into your tree, or wait
> until this hits Linus's tree.

Greg,

I'm already carrying that tree so I'll pick these up unless you particularly want to take
the IIO staging ones with whatever else there is in staging from this series.

Jonathan

> 
> Best regards
> Uwe
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20221118224540.619276-1-uwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     (It wasn't sent to every thread participant because that would have
>     been too many.)
>