[PATCH 4/4] Input: stmfts - use client to make future code cleaner

[David Heidelberg]

On 16/12/2025 07:13, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 03:30:04PM +0100, David Heidelberg via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Petr Hodina <petr.hodina at protonmail.com>
>>
>> Make code cleaner, compiler will optimize it away anyway.
>>
>> Preparation for FTM5 support, where more steps are needed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Petr Hodina <petr.hodina at protonmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <david at ixit.cz>
>> ---
>>   drivers/input/touchscreen/stmfts.c | 3 ++-
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/stmfts.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/stmfts.c
>> index 4b166b0a9a5a6..06845a00348cc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/stmfts.c
>> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/stmfts.c
>> @@ -747,9 +747,10 @@ static int stmfts_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>   static int stmfts_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
>>   {
>>   	struct stmfts_data *sdata = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>> +	struct i2c_client *client = sdata->client;
>>   	int ret;
>>   
>> -	ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte(sdata->client, STMFTS_SLEEP_OUT);
>> +	ret = i2c_smbus_write_byte(client, STMFTS_SLEEP_OUT);
> 
> Sorry but I do not see how using a temporary cleans things up compared
> to a simple structure member access, given that it happens only once
> here.

Thank you for applying rest of patchset.

This one can be postponed together with introducing fts5 support (where 
we need do more steps here).

David

> 
>>   	if (ret)
>>   		dev_err(dev, "failed to resume device: %d\n", ret);
>>   
>>
> 
> Thanks.
> 

-- 
David Heidelberg