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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <hpmm5fhs74swrhkneaif4s5dquqeclujdlua7ygmkvcmtf6n4t@rsahxu23xwfp>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 22:13:11 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: david@...t.cz
Cc: Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, 
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, Petr Hodina <petr.hodina@...tonmail.com>, 
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Andi Shyti <andi@...zian.org>, 
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Input: stmfts - use client to make future code
 cleaner

Hi David,

On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 03:30:04PM +0100, David Heidelberg via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Petr Hodina <petr.hodina@...tonmail.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@...tonmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <david@...t.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.

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

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry