[PATCH] ASoC: mt6660: use simple i2c probe function

[PATCH] ASoC: mt6660: use simple i2c probe function

[Stephen Kitt]

The i2c probe functions here don't use the id information provided in
their second argument, so the single-parameter i2c probe function
("probe_new") can be used instead.

This avoids scanning the identifier tables during probes.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Kitt <steve@sk2.org>
---
 sound/soc/codecs/mt6660.c | 5 ++---
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/mt6660.c b/sound/soc/codecs/mt6660.c
index 3a881523c30f..c84a0b850f89 100644
--- a/sound/soc/codecs/mt6660.c
+++ b/sound/soc/codecs/mt6660.c
@@ -456,8 +456,7 @@ static int _mt6660_read_chip_revision(struct mt6660_chip *chip)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int mt6660_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
-			    const struct i2c_device_id *id)
+static int mt6660_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
 {
 	struct mt6660_chip *chip = NULL;
 	int ret;
@@ -567,7 +566,7 @@ static struct i2c_driver mt6660_i2c_driver = {
 		.of_match_table = of_match_ptr(mt6660_of_id),
 		.pm = &mt6660_dev_pm_ops,
 	},
-	.probe = mt6660_i2c_probe,
+	.probe_new = mt6660_i2c_probe,
 	.remove = mt6660_i2c_remove,
 	.id_table = mt6660_i2c_id,
 };
-- 
2.27.0

Re: [PATCH] ASoC: mt6660: use simple i2c probe function

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 18:37:50 +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> The i2c probe functions here don't use the id information provided in
> their second argument, so the single-parameter i2c probe function
> ("probe_new") can be used instead.
> 
> This avoids scanning the identifier tables during probes.
> 
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] ASoC: mt6660: use simple i2c probe function
      commit: b6d7a80d654fe7c03d4fb0227af2a5ae12ed6632

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark