[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <541FD188.6030602@zonque.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 09:36:40 +0200
From: Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>
To: Matt Ranostay <mranostay@...il.com>
CC: Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cap1106: Add support for various cap11xx devices
On 09/22/2014 12:46 AM, Matt Ranostay wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org> wrote:
>> On 09/21/2014 05:01 AM, Matt Ranostay wrote:
>>> @@ -313,12 +307,16 @@ static int cap1106_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c_client,
>>>
>>> static const struct of_device_id cap1106_dt_ids[] = {
>>> { .compatible = "microchip,cap1106", },
>>> + { .compatible = "microchip,cap1126", },
>>> + { .compatible = "microchip,cap1188", },
>>
>> Hmm, how can that work unless you set .data to the number of channels
>> here? Did you test that with a DT-enabled board?
>>
> Yes it was tested on a BBB. The num_channels is set from cap1106_i2c_ids
Ah ok. I forgot there's this fallback to the i2c ids. What others driver
do is to use of_match_device() in the probe function, and then access
->data of the returned match.
But I'm fine with falling back to cap1106_i2c_ids unless anyone else has
objections.
Thanks,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists