Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:31:56 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
CC:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
        <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] iio: common: cros_ec_sensors: simplify getting
 .driver_data
Message-ID: <20211012093156.00006cb0@Huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <YWU5v8aH3wtsAMlp@ninjato>
References: <20210920090522.23784-1-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
        <20210920090522.23784-7-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
        <716533b5-380d-be72-b45e-d9909f09286b@collabora.com>
        <20210925155445.1edf4752@jic23-huawei>
        <YWU5v8aH3wtsAMlp@ninjato>
Organization: Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:31:11 +0200
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
> 
> > It's not something that ever bothered me that much, but we have had debates in
> > the past about whether there are semantic issues around this sort of cleanup
> > as it mixes
> > 
> > platform_set_drvdata() with device_get_drvdata()  
> 
> Yeah, I see this concern. Mixing the two makes reading the code a bit
> more difficult. As I said, it wasn't so easy to convert set_drvdata, but
> I will have another go at this.
> 
> > Whilst they access the same pointer today, in theory that isn't necessarily
> > always going to be the case in future and it isn't necessarily apparent
> > to the casual reader of the code.  
> 
> That one I don't really see. *_get_drvdata() should always get
> 'dev->driver_data' and the prefix just tells from what namespace we
> come. If you want to change that, a lot of things will break loose, I'd
> think. Even in the unlikely case of platform_device gaining a seperate
> driver_data(?), it probably should be named *_get_pdrvdata(), or?

Agreed. Does indeed seem like any change to this would be a mess so would
require different naming etc.

Thanks,

Jonathan

> 
> Thanks and happy hacking,
> 
>    Wolfram
> 
>