Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] HID: i2c-hid: acpi: Drop redundant ACPI_PTR()
From: Benjamin Tissoires <hidden>
Date: 2021-03-01 14:40:28
Also in:
lkml
Hi, On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 8:34 PM Andy Shevchenko [off-list ref] wrote:
The driver depends on ACPI, ACPI_PTR() resolution is always the same. Otherwise a compiler may produce a warning. That said, the rule of thumb either ugly ifdeffery with ACPI_PTR or none should be used in a driver. Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Thanks a lot for the series. This indeed cleans things up. For the series: Acked-by: Benjamin Tissoires <redacted> Jiri, I wonder where we want to land this one. This is not strictly bug fixes, but we could definitively sneak this one in 5.12-rc1. Well, I should probably run the series on an acpi laptop here before merging, but I'd like to know if delaying to 5.13 is OK or if we need this in 5.12. Cheers, Benjamin
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
--- v2: no changes drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid-acpi.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid-acpi.c b/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid-acpi.c index a4810f199d59..a6f0257a26de 100644 --- a/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid-acpi.c +++ b/drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid-acpi.c@@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ static struct i2c_driver i2c_hid_acpi_driver = { .name = "i2c_hid_acpi", .pm = &i2c_hid_core_pm, .probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS, - .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(i2c_hid_acpi_match), + .acpi_match_table = i2c_hid_acpi_match, }, .probe_new = i2c_hid_acpi_probe, --2.30.0