Re: [PATCH 00/18] a few rtc driver cleanups

From: "André Draszik" <andre.draszik@linaro.org>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Cc: "Chanwoo Choi" <cw00.choi@samsung.com>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Joel Stanley" <joel@jms.id.au>,
	"Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>,
	"Hans Ulli Kroll" <ulli.kroll@googlemail.com>,
	"Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	"Neil Armstrong" <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>,
	"Kevin Hilman" <khilman@baylibre.com>,
	"Jerome Brunet" <jbrunet@baylibre.com>,
	"Martin Blumenstingl" <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>,
	"Tóth János" <gomba007@gmail.com>,
	"Dianlong Li" <long17.cool@163.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] a few rtc driver cleanups
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 08:45:47 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d0042850eb4d9898559b56505291c4e849d44c5.camel@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250301203658839d5482@mail.local>

Hi Alexandre,

On Sat, 2025-03-01 at 21:36 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 28/02/2025 14:07:13+0000, André Draszik wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > While looking at RTC, I noticed that various drivers are keeping
> > pointers to data that they're not using themselves throughout their
> > lifetime.
> > 
> > So I took the liberty to drop these pointers and this series is the
> > result.
> > 
> > The last two patches also convert two drivers to using dev_err_probe(),
> > as I looked slightly closer into those two. They don't exactly fit the
> > general subject of removal of unneeded pointers, but I wanted to share
> > them anyway, since they're ready.
> > 
> > All of this was compile-tested only.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Andre'
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > André Draszik (18):
> >       rtc: max77686: drop needless struct max77686_rtc_info::rtc member
> >       rtc: s5m: drop needless struct s5m_rtc_info::i2c member
> >       rtc: aspeed: drop needless struct aspeed_rtc::rtc_dev member
> >       rtc: ds2404: drop needless struct ds2404::rtc member
> >       rtc: ep93xx: drop needless struct ep93xx_rtc::rtc member
> >       rtc: ftrtc010: drop needless struct ftrtc010_rtc::rtc_dev member
> >       rtc: m48t86: drop needless struct m48t86_rtc_info::rtc member
> >       rtc: meson: drop needless struct meson_rtc::rtc member
> >       rtc: meson-vrtc: drop needless struct meson_vrtc_data::rtc member
> >       rtc: pl030: drop needless struct pl030_rtc::rtc member
> >       rtc: rx8581: drop needless struct rx8581::rtc member
> >       rtc: s35390a: drop needless struct s35390a::rtc member
> >       rtc: sd2405al: drop needless struct sd2405al::rtc member
> >       rtc: sd3078: drop needless struct sd3078::rtc member
> 
> My main concern with this is that as soon as we introduce irq support,
> we are going to need the rtc pointer back in the struct. But I guess
> that most of them are old enough to say that nobody is interested in irq
> support.

Thanks for your thoughts Alexandre - I don't know the history of
these drivers and don't mind either way. I can drop those patches
that would require reintroducing if irq support is added in the
future. I think overall you're OK with keeping them, but please
let me know if I'm misunderstanding :-)

> 
> >       rtc: rx8581: drop needless struct rx8581
> >       rtc: sd3078: drop needless struct sd3078
> 
> I guess you could squash those two with the previous ones touching the
> respective drivers because you are the one removing the last remaining
> struct member.

Will do.

Cheers,
Andre'

_______________________________________________
linux-amlogic mailing list
linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-amlogic