Re: [PATCH 1/4] Input RMI4 - rename rmi_function_container to rmi_function

[Christopher Heiny <cheiny@synaptics.com>]

On 11/27/2012 01:21 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> To save my old fingers...
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov<dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> It looks like this driver(s) need some love and I might have some time so I
> will refresh my "synaptics" branch with the patches you have sent and start
> working off it. If you have updates I would appreciate if you also make them
> available relative to that branch. When we are ready we'll squash them all
> together and apply to the official branch.

No problem - let me know which branch/tag to work with, and we'll be 
happy to patch against that for the next round.

>
> Thanks.
>
>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c | 158 +++++++++++----------
>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.h |   4 +-
>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c    | 298 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f11.c    | 258 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
>   include/linux/rmi.h             |  22 ++-
>   5 files changed, 368 insertions(+), 372 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> index 05a73ae..e8a4b52 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> @@ -594,7 +594,7 @@ static struct device_attribute bsr_attribute = __ATTR(bsr, RMI_RW_ATTR,
>
>   static void rmi_free_function_list(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev)
>   {
> -	struct rmi_function_container *entry, *n;
> +	struct rmi_function *entry, *n;
>   	struct rmi_driver_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev);
>
>   	if (!data) {
> @@ -613,44 +613,44 @@ static void rmi_free_function_list(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev)
>   	}
>   }
>
> -static void release_fc_device(struct device *dev)
> +static void release_function_device(struct device *dev)
>   {
>   	dev_dbg(dev, "REMOVING KOBJ!");
>   	kobject_put(&dev->kobj);
>   }

Hmmm.  Since rmi_function_container has evolved into a child device of 
the RMI4 module, maybe it would be better renamed rmi_function_device or 
rmi_function_dev?  I find this clearer, but can live with just 
rmi_function if you prefer that.


Similarly, rmi_function_handler has evolved into a driver for such 
devices, so perhaps it should be renamed rmi_function_driver?

[snip]