From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Replace acpi_bus_get_device() that is going to be dropped with
acpi_fetch_acpi_dev().
No intentional functional impact.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
---
drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c | 17 ++++++-----------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c
@@ -236,7 +236,8 @@ static int i2c_acpi_get_info(struct acpi
struct acpi_device *adapter_adev;
/* The adapter must be present */
- if (acpi_bus_get_device(lookup.adapter_handle, &adapter_adev))
+ adapter_adev = acpi_fetch_acpi_dev(lookup.adapter_handle);
+ if (!adapter_adev)
return -ENODEV;
if (acpi_bus_get_status(adapter_adev) ||
!adapter_adev->status.present)
@@ -275,13 +276,10 @@ static acpi_status i2c_acpi_add_device(a
void *data, void **return_value)
{
struct i2c_adapter *adapter = data;
- struct acpi_device *adev;
+ struct acpi_device *adev = acpi_fetch_acpi_dev(handle);
struct i2c_board_info info;
- if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &adev))
- return AE_OK;
-
- if (i2c_acpi_get_info(adev, &info, adapter, NULL))
+ if (!adev || i2c_acpi_get_info(adev, &info, adapter, NULL))
return AE_OK;
i2c_acpi_register_device(adapter, adev, &info);
@@ -341,12 +339,9 @@ static acpi_status i2c_acpi_lookup_speed
void *data, void **return_value)
{
struct i2c_acpi_lookup *lookup = data;
- struct acpi_device *adev;
-
- if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &adev))
- return AE_OK;
+ struct acpi_device *adev = acpi_fetch_acpi_dev(handle);
- if (i2c_acpi_do_lookup(adev, lookup))
+ if (!adev || i2c_acpi_do_lookup(adev, lookup))
return AE_OK;
if (lookup->search_handle != lookup->adapter_handle)
On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 07:00:42PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
>
> Replace acpi_bus_get_device() that is going to be dropped with
> acpi_fetch_acpi_dev().
>
> No intentional functional impact.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Applied to for-next, thanks! Let me know if you need it in for-current
instead to get rid of the to-be-deprecated function earlier.