On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 10:06 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > +static const struct devs_id pcal9555a_1_dev_id __initconst = {
> > + .name = "pcal9555a-1",
> > + .type = SFI_DEV_TYPE_I2C,
> > + .delay = 1,
> > + .get_platform_data = &pcal9555a_platform_data,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct devs_id pcal9555a_2_dev_id __initconst = {
> > + .name = "pcal9555a-2",
> > + .type = SFI_DEV_TYPE_I2C,
> > + .delay = 1,
> > + .get_platform_data = &pcal9555a_platform_data,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct devs_id pcal9555a_3_dev_id __initconst = {
> > + .name = "pcal9555a-3",
> > + .type = SFI_DEV_TYPE_I2C,
> > + .delay = 1,
> > + .get_platform_data = &pcal9555a_platform_data,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct devs_id pcal9555a_4_dev_id __initconst = {
> > + .name = "pcal9555a-4",
> > + .type = SFI_DEV_TYPE_I2C,
> > + .delay = 1,
> > + .get_platform_data = &pcal9555a_platform_data,
> > +};
>
> I have the same complaint as yesterday. Going forward could we please
> get nice
> structure initializers in all future patches? :)
Oops, indeed. Sorry, will send new version soon.
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
