Re: [PATCH 10/10] i2c: i801: Improve handling platform data for tco device

[Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>]

On 05.08.2021 20:32, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Aug 2021 16:24:30 +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> The platform data structures are used in the respective i801_add_tco
>> functions only. Therefore we can make the definitions local to these
>> functions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c
>> index 1ca92a1e0..64217479a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c
>> @@ -1464,15 +1464,14 @@ static inline unsigned int i801_get_adapter_class(struct i801_priv *priv)
>>  }
>>  #endif
>>  
>> -static const struct itco_wdt_platform_data spt_tco_platform_data = {
>> -	.name = "Intel PCH",
>> -	.version = 4,
>> -};
>> -
>>  static struct platform_device *
>>  i801_add_tco_spt(struct i801_priv *priv, struct pci_dev *pci_dev,
>>  		 struct resource *tco_res)
>>  {
>> +	static const struct itco_wdt_platform_data pldata = {
>> +		.name = "Intel PCH",
>> +		.version = 4,
>> +	};
>>  	static DEFINE_MUTEX(p2sb_mutex);
>>  	struct resource *res;
>>  	unsigned int devfn;
>> @@ -1516,22 +1515,20 @@ i801_add_tco_spt(struct i801_priv *priv, struct pci_dev *pci_dev,
>>  	res->flags = IORESOURCE_MEM;
>>  
>>  	return platform_device_register_resndata(&pci_dev->dev, "iTCO_wdt", -1,
>> -					tco_res, 2, &spt_tco_platform_data,
>> -					sizeof(spt_tco_platform_data));
>> +					tco_res, 2, &pldata, sizeof(pldata));
>>  }
>>  
>> -static const struct itco_wdt_platform_data cnl_tco_platform_data = {
>> -	.name = "Intel PCH",
>> -	.version = 6,
>> -};
>> -
>>  static struct platform_device *
>>  i801_add_tco_cnl(struct i801_priv *priv, struct pci_dev *pci_dev,
>>  		 struct resource *tco_res)
>>  {
>> -	return platform_device_register_resndata(&pci_dev->dev,
>> -			"iTCO_wdt", -1, tco_res, 1, &cnl_tco_platform_data,
>> -			sizeof(cnl_tco_platform_data));
>> +	static const struct itco_wdt_platform_data pldata = {
>> +		.name = "Intel PCH",
>> +		.version = 6,
>> +	};
>> +
>> +	return platform_device_register_resndata(&pci_dev->dev, "iTCO_wdt", -1,
>> +						 tco_res, 1, &pldata, sizeof(pldata));
>>  }
>>  
>>  static void i801_add_tco(struct i801_priv *priv)
> 
> I don't really care either way, to be honest. But fine with me.
> 
To explain the motivation: I try to restrict visibility of a variable as much
as possible. This reduces risk of misuse / mistakes / name collisions.

> Reviewed-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
>