[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140829084538.GC1329@katana>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:45:38 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...inux.com, grant.likely@...aro.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linus.walleij@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/8] i2c: Relax mandatory I2C ID table passing
Hi Lee,
> Placing this firmly back on your plate. I truly hope we don't miss
> another merge-window.
Nope, we won't. I'll still need a week or so due to other duties.
> This patch-set has the support of some pretty
> senior kernel maintainers, so I hope acceptance shouldn't be too
> difficult.
Cool, then they could ack it like Grant did? That surely helps.
> As previously discussed I believe it should be okay for an I2C device
> driver _not_ supply an I2C ID table to match to.
I agree...
> The I2C subsystem
> should be able to match via other means, such as via OF tables. The
> blocking factor during our previous conversation was to keep
> registering via sysfs up and running. This set does that.
... yet it also should not cause regressions. If you fixed that, sounds
great!
> After thinking more deeply about the problem, it occurred to me that
> any I2C device driver which uses the sysfs method and issues an
> of_match_device() would also fail their probe(). Bolted on to this
> set is a new, more generic way for these devices to match against
> either of the I2C/OF tables.
Even better :) I am generally positive with your patchset, but need to
review the implementation. For core stuff, this simply needs more
attention.
Thanks,
Wolfram
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists