After commit 0edb555a65d1 ("platform: Make platform_driver::remove()
return void") .remove_new isn't supposed to be used any more. To be able
to eventually drop .remove_new, switch the driver to use .remove which
has the same functionality.

Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
---
Hello,

the driver was introduced in commit
6894f640b8f3f48700ccc828419ba60704f5a405 which happens after I sent the
patch that became e6be2197ec38 ("i2c: Switch back to struct
platform_driver::remove()") that converted all of drivers/i2c. So here
comes a separate patch for this driver.

Best regards
Uwe

 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cgbc.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cgbc.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cgbc.c
index eba0b205de11..f054d167ac47 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cgbc.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cgbc.c
@@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ static struct platform_driver cgbc_i2c_driver = {
 		.name = "cgbc-i2c",
 	},
 	.probe		= cgbc_i2c_probe,
-	.remove_new	= cgbc_i2c_remove,
+	.remove		= cgbc_i2c_remove,
 };
 
 module_platform_driver(cgbc_i2c_driver);

base-commit: 6894f640b8f3f48700ccc828419ba60704f5a405
-- 
2.45.2

Hi Uwe,

On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 11:13:21AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> After commit 0edb555a65d1 ("platform: Make platform_driver::remove()
> return void") .remove_new isn't supposed to be used any more. To be able
> to eventually drop .remove_new, switch the driver to use .remove which
> has the same functionality.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
> ---
> Hello,
> 
> the driver was introduced in commit
> 6894f640b8f3f48700ccc828419ba60704f5a405 which happens after I sent the
> patch that became e6be2197ec38 ("i2c: Switch back to struct
> platform_driver::remove()") that converted all of drivers/i2c. So here
> comes a separate patch for this driver.
> 
> Best regards
> Uwe
> 
>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cgbc.c | 2 +-

This driver has not been merged yet.

Andi

> This driver has not been merged yet.

It is in Lee's MFD tree, and thus, in -next.  It will go to Linus' tree
this mergewindow.

> > This driver has not been merged yet.
> 
> It is in Lee's MFD tree, and thus, in -next.  It will go to Linus' tree
> this mergewindow.

right! I saw it but forgot about it... then I will pin this
patch for later.

Thanks, Wolfram!
Andi

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 08:01:20AM +0100, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > > This driver has not been merged yet.
> > 
> > It is in Lee's MFD tree, and thus, in -next.  It will go to Linus' tree
> > this mergewindow.
> 
> right! I saw it but forgot about it... then I will pin this
> patch for later.

Lee provided an immutable branch with all the patches. If you pull it
into your tree next time, you probably won't forget :)

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 08:16:59AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 08:01:20AM +0100, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > > > This driver has not been merged yet.
> > > 
> > > It is in Lee's MFD tree, and thus, in -next.  It will go to Linus' tree
> > > this mergewindow.
> > 
> > right! I saw it but forgot about it... then I will pin this
> > patch for later.
> 
> Lee provided an immutable branch with all the patches. If you pull it
> into your tree next time, you probably won't forget :)

That would be fine. The patch was marked as "Not Applicable" in
patchwork. For the time being I updated that to "Awaiting Upstream"
(though that doesn't make it appear as actionable).

If you don't pull, be asserted that I will remember you as my quest to
drop remove_new depends on that.

Best regards
Uwe

Hi Uwe,

On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 08:33:44AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 08:16:59AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 08:01:20AM +0100, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > > > > This driver has not been merged yet.
> > > > 
> > > > It is in Lee's MFD tree, and thus, in -next.  It will go to Linus' tree
> > > > this mergewindow.
> > > 
> > > right! I saw it but forgot about it... then I will pin this
> > > patch for later.
> > 
> > Lee provided an immutable branch with all the patches. If you pull it
> > into your tree next time, you probably won't forget :)
> 
> That would be fine. The patch was marked as "Not Applicable" in
> patchwork. For the time being I updated that to "Awaiting Upstream"
> (though that doesn't make it appear as actionable).

I updated it to "Not Applicable". I was going to set the proper
status, thanks for doing it.

> If you don't pull, be asserted that I will remember you as my quest to
> drop remove_new depends on that.

Thanks! :-)

Andi