@@ -9,7 +9,6 @@
* https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/adc124s021.pdf
*/
-#include <linux/acpi.h>
#include <linux/err.h>
#include <linux/spi/spi.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
@@ -201,19 +200,17 @@ static const struct spi_device_id adc128_id[] = {
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(spi, adc128_id);
-#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
static const struct acpi_device_id adc128_acpi_match[] = {
{ "AANT1280", (kernel_ulong_t)&adc128_config[2] },
{ }
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, adc128_acpi_match);
-#endif
static struct spi_driver adc128_driver = {
.driver = {
.name = "adc128s052",
.of_match_table = adc128_of_match,
- .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(adc128_acpi_match),
+ .acpi_match_table = adc128_acpi_match,
},
.probe = adc128_probe,
.id_table = adc128_id,
ACPI_PTR() is more harmful than helpful. For example, in this case if CONFIG_ACPI=n, the ID table left unused and code is obfuscated by ifdeffery. Drop anti-pattern of ACPI_PTR() use. Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> --- drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc128s052.c | 5 +---- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)