From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Darren Hart Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] platform/x86: silead_dmi - do not treat all devices as i2c_clients Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 09:31:54 -0700 Message-ID: <20170404163154.GE5936@fury> References: <20170404032514.31832-1-dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> <20170404160540.GD5936@fury> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:52554 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754342AbdDDQb4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2017 12:31:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Hans de Goede , Andy Shevchenko , Platform Driver , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 07:08:28PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 7:05 PM, Darren Hart wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 04:45:05PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Dmitry Torokhov > >> wrote: > >> > I2C bus has both i2c clients and adapter devices, so we must be careful in > >> > notifier code and verify that we are actually dealing with an i2c client > >> > before using it as such. > >> > >> > -static void silead_ts_dmi_add_props(struct device *dev) > >> > +static void silead_ts_dmi_add_props(struct i2c_client *client) > >> > { > >> > >> > - struct i2c_client *client = to_i2c_client(dev); > >> > >> I would replace this by > >> struct device *dev = &client->dev; > >> > >> Otherwise looks good for me. > > > > Andy, this series looks like a candidate for 4.11-fixes. We're already at rc5 > > though, so if we are going to do that, I'd like to see a stronger statement in > > the commit log about how this issue manifests currently - if it does. > > It makes less changes for any (potentially) backported code. > I'm not insisting and even can do myself. Sorry, I was referring to the series itself, not your feedback above. You assigned this to yourself in patchwork, so I was just noting that this patch series may be a candidate for fixes to 4.11, rather than testing/for-next for 4.12. Your call. -- Darren Hart VMware Open Source Technology Center