On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 01:58:08PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > From: Lars Poeschel <[email protected]> > > This removes an assignment in device_add. It assigned the parent > kobject to the kobject of the new device. This is not necessary, > because the call to kobject_add a few lines later also does this same > assignment. > > Signed-off-by: Lars Poeschel <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/base/core.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c > index bb5806a2bd4c..03b5396cd192 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/core.c > +++ b/drivers/base/core.c > @@ -2847,8 +2847,6 @@ int device_add(struct device *dev) > error = PTR_ERR(kobj); > goto parent_error; > } > - if (kobj) > - dev->kobj.parent = kobj; > > /* use parent numa_node */ > if (parent && (dev_to_node(dev) == NUMA_NO_NODE)) > @@ -2856,7 +2854,7 @@ int device_add(struct device *dev) > > /* first, register with generic layer. */ > /* we require the name to be set before, and pass NULL */ > - error = kobject_add(&dev->kobj, dev->kobj.parent, NULL); > + error = kobject_add(&dev->kobj, kobj, NULL);
That's very subtle, and might not really be correct for all users, have you checked? Anyway, I'd rather leave this as-is if possible, as we know this works correctly, and it is not going to save any time/energy to remove that assignment, right? thanks, greg k-h
