[PATCH] treewide: rename leftover device_d

[Marco Felsch]

Hi Ahmad,

On 23-02-21, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> We have some instances of device_d and driver_d still lingering in
> documentation and commented out code. Let's drop these as well.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <ahmad at a3f.at>
> ---
>  Documentation/devel/porting.rst        | 2 +-
>  drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c      | 2 +-
>  drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h           | 2 +-
>  fs/cramfs/cramfs.c                     | 2 +-
>  include/linux/mfd/core.h               | 2 +-
>  include/platform_data/eth-smc911x.h    | 2 +-
>  include/platform_data/serial-ns16550.h | 2 +-
>  7 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devel/porting.rst b/Documentation/devel/porting.rst
> index 8af0456ab2d5..619c5e49e00f 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devel/porting.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/devel/porting.rst
> @@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ tree binding, you can write a driver that matches against your board's
>    	{ /* sentinel */ },
>    };
>  
> -  static struct driver_d my_board_driver = {
> +  static struct driver my_board_driver = {
>    	.name = "board-mine",
>    	.probe = my_board_probe,
>    	.of_compatible = my_board_of_match,
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c
> index e8e690311148..c7252ce72a27 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_omap_gpmc.c
> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
>   * A typical device registration is as follows:
>   *
>   * @code
> - * static struct device_d my_nand_device = {
> + * static struct device my_nand_device = {
>   *	.name = "gpmc_nand",
>   *	.id = some identifier you need to show.. e.g. "gpmc_nand0"
>   *	.resource[0].start = GPMC base address
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h
> index a0467ff3c465..c9a0a8eed662 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h
> +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h
> @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ struct musb {
>  	u16			int_rx;
>  	u16			int_tx;
>  
> -	//struct device_d		*phydev;
> +	//struct device		*phydev;

IMHO this line can be removed completely.

Regards,
  Marco