[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fec1c0d1-425d-542e-bb6c-402b47b46ceb@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2017 10:13:45 +0100
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table
Hello Wolfram,
On 11/05/2017 10:53 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 12:49:48PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> The driver doesn't have a struct of_device_id table but supported devices
>> are registered via Device Trees. This is working on the assumption that a
>> I2C device registered via OF will always match a legacy I2C device ID and
>> that the MODALIAS reported will always be of the form i2c:<device>.
>>
>> But this could change in the future so the correct approach is to have an
>> OF device ID table if the devices are registered via OF.
>>
>> To maintain backward compatibility with old Device Trees, only use the OF
>> device ID table .data if the device was registered via OF and the OF node
>> compatible matches an entry in the OF device ID table.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@...hat.com>
>>
>
> Applied to for-next, thanks for keeping at it!
>
Great, thanks a lot for your feedback and suggestions on this series.
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement
Red Hat
Powered by blists - more mailing lists