[PATCH 1/3] gpio: zynq: use module_platform_driver to simplify the code

Bartosz Golaszewski bgolaszewski at baylibre.com
Tue Apr 13 11:43:48 BST 2021


On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 12:08 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, April 9, 2021, Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli at xilinx.com> wrote:
>>
>> module_platform_driver() makes the code simpler by eliminating
>> boilerplate code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli at xilinx.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c | 17 +----------------
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> index 3521c1dc3ac0..bb1ac0c5cf26 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> @@ -1020,22 +1020,7 @@ static struct platform_driver zynq_gpio_driver = {
>>         .remove = zynq_gpio_remove,
>>  };
>>
>> -/**
>> - * zynq_gpio_init - Initial driver registration call
>> - *
>> - * Return: value from platform_driver_register
>> - */
>> -static int __init zynq_gpio_init(void)
>> -{
>> -       return platform_driver_register(&zynq_gpio_driver);
>> -}
>> -postcore_initcall(zynq_gpio_init);
>
>
>
> It’s not an equivalent. Have you tested on actual hardware? If no, there is no go for this change.
>

Yep, this has been like this since the initial introduction of this
driver. Unfortunately there's no documented reason so unless we can
test it, it has to stay this way.

Bartosz



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list