[PATCH] backlight: ktz8866: Convert to i2c's .probe_new()

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hello,

On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 08:36:28AM +0800, Jianhua Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 04:26:39PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > The probe function doesn't make use of the i2c_device_id * parameter so
> > it can be trivially converted.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> > Hello,
> > 
> > there is an ongoing effort to convert all drivers to .probe_new to
> > eventually drop .probe with the i2c_device_id parameter. This driver
> > currently sits in next so wasn't on my radar before.
> > 
> > My plan is to tackle that after the next merge window. So I ask you to
> > either apply this patch during the next merge window or accept that it
> > will go in via the i2c tree together with the patch that drops .probe().
> > 
> > Best regards
> > Uwe
> > 
> >  drivers/video/backlight/ktz8866.c | 5 ++---
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/ktz8866.c b/drivers/video/backlight/ktz8866.c
> > index 97b723719e13..d38c13ad39c7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/ktz8866.c
> > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/ktz8866.c
> > @@ -124,8 +124,7 @@ static void ktz8866_init(struct ktz8866 *ktz)
> >  		ktz8866_write(ktz, LCD_BIAS_CFG1, LCD_BIAS_EN);
> >  }
> >  
> > -static int ktz8866_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > -			 const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> > +static int ktz8866_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> >  {
> >  	struct backlight_device *backlight_dev;
> >  	struct backlight_properties props;
> > @@ -197,7 +196,7 @@ static struct i2c_driver ktz8866_driver = {
> >  		.name = "ktz8866",
> >  		.of_match_table = ktz8866_match_table,
> >  	},
> > -	.probe = ktz8866_probe,
> > +	.probe_new = ktz8866_probe,
> 
> I think .probe_new() will be renamed to new .probe() again when there are
> patches dropping old .probe().

Right, the plan is to reintroduce .probe with the prototype that
.probe_new has today.

> I prefer that you pack this commit to the i2c-tree commit that drops
> old .probe(). 

That's fine for me. Can I interpret this as an Ack for this patch?

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20230128/0ea6e314/attachment.sig>