On 5/14/20 3:31 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 02:07:41AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Factor out common code into ks8851_probe_common() and
>> ks8851_remove_common() to permit both SPI and parallel
>> bus driver variants to use the common code path for
>> both probing and removal.
>>
>> There should be no functional change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de>
>> Cc: David S. Miller <da...@davemloft.net>
>> Cc: Lukas Wunner <lu...@wunner.de>
>> Cc: Petr Stetiar <yn...@true.cz>
>> Cc: YueHaibing <yuehaib...@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> V2: - Add RB from Andrew
>> - Rework on top of locking patches, drop RB
>> V3: No change
>> V4: No change
>> V5: Pass message enable as parameter to common probe function,
>> so the MODULE_* bits can be per-driver
>> ---
>> drivers/net/ethernet/micrel/ks8851.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/micrel/ks8851.c
>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/micrel/ks8851.c
>> index 440ddd5cafbd..791b2f14dd9d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/micrel/ks8851.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/micrel/ks8851.c
>> @@ -1431,27 +1431,15 @@ static int ks8851_resume(struct device *dev)
>>
>> static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(ks8851_pm_ops, ks8851_suspend, ks8851_resume);
>>
>> -static int ks8851_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>> +static int ks8851_probe_common(struct net_device *netdev, struct device
>> *dev,
>> + int msg_en)
>> {
>
>>
>> - dev_info(dev, "message enable is %d\n", msg_enable);
>> + dev_info(dev, "message enable is %d\n", msg_en);
>>
>> /* set the default message enable */
>> - ks->msg_enable = netif_msg_init(msg_enable, (NETIF_MSG_DRV |
>> - NETIF_MSG_PROBE |
>> - NETIF_MSG_LINK));
>> + ks->msg_enable = netif_msg_init(msg_en, NETIF_MSG_DRV |
>> + NETIF_MSG_PROBE |
>> + NETIF_MSG_LINK);
>
> It would of been nice to keep the name msg_en, then these changes
> would not be needed. Or is there something not visible in this patch
> which means the variable name it not usable?
I think this is just a product of the back-and-forth this patch went
through, to fix some line-over-80 issue in the previous iteration(s).
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch>
>
> Andrew
>
