[-mm patch] hdaps: Add explicit hardware configuration functions - fix

[-mm patch] hdaps: Add explicit hardware configuration functions - fix

[Shem Multinymous]

Fixes two things about hdaps_check_ec() in the hdaps driver:
1. Remove the __init, it may be called well after module init, during resume.
2. Remove an unused parameter.

Signed-off-by: Shem Multinymous <multinymous@gmail.com>
---
This applies on top of
hdaps-add-explicit-hardware-configuration-functions.patch
currently in -mm
(LKML: "[PATCH 08/12] hdaps: Add explicit hardware configuration functions").

Andrew, do you prefer to get the full rolled-up patch in such cases?

--- a/drivers/hwmon/hdaps.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/hdaps.c
@@ -305,7 +305,7 @@ static int hdaps_get_ec_mode(u8 *mode)
  * Follows the clean-room spec for HDAPS; we don't know what it means.
  * Returns zero on success and negative error code on failure.  Can sleep.
  */
-static int __init hdaps_check_ec(u8 *mode)
+static int hdaps_check_ec()
 {
 	const struct thinkpad_ec_row args =
 		{ .mask=0x0003, .val={0x17, 0x81} };
@@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static int hdaps_device_init(void)
 	if (mode==0x00)
 		{ ABORT_INIT("accelerometer not available"); goto bad; }

-	if (hdaps_check_ec(&mode))
+	if (hdaps_check_ec())
 		{ ABORT_INIT("hdaps_check_ec failed"); goto bad; }

 	if (hdaps_set_power(1))

Re: [-mm patch] hdaps: Add explicit hardware configuration functions - fix

[Pavel Machek]

On Wed 2006-08-16 01:26:07, Shem Multinymous wrote:
> Fixes two things about hdaps_check_ec() in the hdaps driver:
> 1. Remove the __init, it may be called well after module init, during 
> resume.
> 2. Remove an unused parameter.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shem Multinymous <multinymous@gmail.com>

Looks okay to me.

Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Re: [-mm patch] hdaps: Add explicit hardware configuration functions - fix

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 01:26:07 +0300
"Shem Multinymous" <multinymous@gmail.com> wrote:

> Andrew, do you prefer to get the full rolled-up patch in such cases?

If practical, little fine-grained patches like this are much preferred, thanks.