On 2018-08-29 20:42, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 1:03 PM Peter Rosin <p...@axentia.se> wrote:
>>
>> On 2018-08-28 03:52, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> In preparation to remove the node name pointer from struct device_node,
>>> convert printf users to use the %pOFn format specifier.
>>>
>>> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org>
>>> Cc: Paul Mackerras <pau...@samba.org>
>>> Cc: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
>>> Cc: Peter Rosin <p...@axentia.se>
>>> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
>>> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-powermac.c | 15 ++++++++-------
>>>  drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-gpmux.c |  4 ++--
>>>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-powermac.c 
>>> b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-powermac.c
>>> index f2a2067525ef..b706fd136ca5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-powermac.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-powermac.c
>>> @@ -390,7 +390,6 @@ static int i2c_powermac_probe(struct platform_device 
>>> *dev)
>>>       struct pmac_i2c_bus *bus = dev_get_platdata(&dev->dev);
>>>       struct device_node *parent = NULL;
>>
>> Lose the initializer...
> 
> That's pretty much unrelated though.

I disagree. If you remove the need for the initializer, it's very much
related to also remove the initializer.

> I'd have to write "Also, remove
> the unnecessary parent pointer init" in the commit message and we all
> know "Also" is a clue for belongs in a separate patch.

How about: "This makes the parent pointer initializer redundant, lose it."

See, no "Also" in there, and no separate patch needed. Or don't mention it
at all.

Cheers,
Peter

Reply via email to