[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aW-p4F4lG-zhPJ7H@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 18:14:24 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Shrikant <raskar.shree97@...il.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
david.hunter.linux@...il.com, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] iio: proximity: rfd77402: Add interrupt handling
support
On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 09:29:50PM +0530, Shrikant wrote:
...
> > > > > + i2c_set_clientdata(client, indio_dev);
> > > >
> > > > Is it used?
> > > Yes, it is used in rfd77402_init().
> >
> > Can it be passed directly?
> >
> > In other words, can we refactor code to get rid of the i2c_set_clientdata() and
> > respective getter calls?
> Yes, I can pass struct rfd77402_data *data as an argument to rfd77402_init() and
> then I can avoid the i2c_set_clientdata() and respective getter calls.
> But for that I
> also need to update the rfd77402_resume() as below:
>
> static int rfd77402_resume(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct iio_dev *indio_dev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> struct rfd77402_data *data = iio_priv(indio_dev);
>
> return rfd77402_init(data);
> }
Ah, this makes a lot of sense now. But leave this call only for the PM
callbacks. In other words, please change the parameter of rfd77402_init().
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists