[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140103155217.GG7132@katana>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 16:52:17 +0100
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>
Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
khali@...ux-fr.org, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
jacmet@...site.dk, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c-designware-pci: Index Haswell ULT bus names from
0
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 02:09:59PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 06:14:18PM -0800, Benson Leung wrote:
> > Hi Wolfram,
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> wrote:
> > >> In the chromeos_laptop driver, I do by-name matching of i2c busses to
> > >> find busses and instantiate devices, so there is value to have each
> > >> named something predictable.
> > >
> > > Any why don't you use fixed bus numbers which you can attach the devices
> > > to?
> >
> > On this particular set of systems, there are two other classes of i2c
> > adapters that use dynamically assigned bus numbers, specifically the
> > i915 gmbus adapters, and the i801_smbus adapter. This is why
> > chromeos_laptop uses the name matching, as some of the boards that it
> > supports have devices on those dynamic busses.
>
> I am not sure I get the problem. If you use i2c_register_board_info() to
> register the known devices on the designware busses the dynamically
> assigned numbers are guaranteed to be enumarated higer than the static
> ones. Check drivers/i2c/i2c-boardinfo.c.
Ping. Was this helpful or do you still have the issue?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists