[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171204104140.GZ22431@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 12:41:40 +0200
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Jeremy Cline <jeremy@...ine.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Lars Kellogg-Stedman <lars@...bit.com>,
Steven Presser <steve@...ssers.name>,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] iio: accel: bmc150: Check for a second ACPI device
for BOSC0200
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 11:29:31AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> i2c_new_secondary_device() is for a different purpose, this is for when
> a single i2c device listens on multiple addresses and the driver wants
> separate i2c_client-s to use to talk to each address.
>
> In this case there are 2 separate devices, not a single device listening
> on multiple addresses. Something like i2c_new_secondary_device() ACPI
> support might be useful for i2c devices where a single device / "IC" listens
> on multiple addresses and all these addresses are listed in the ACPI resource
> table, but not for this specific case.
Right, thanks Hans for correcting me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists