Re: [RFC PATCH 3/8] Add PCA9536 4 bit I2C GPIO extender support to the pca9539 GPIO driver

From: David Brownell <david-b-yBeKhBN/0LDR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Guennadi Liakhovetski
	<g.liakhovetski-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: video4linux-list-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
	i2c-GZX6beZjE8VD60Wz+7aTrA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/8] Add PCA9536 4 bit I2C GPIO extender support to the pca9539 GPIO driver
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:49:41 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200801310349.41945.david-b@pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801311204280.6494-0199iw4Nj15frtckUFj5Ag@public.gmane.org>

On Thursday 31 January 2008, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> 
> > > So, actually, using my descriptor array is nearer to what it eventually 
> > > should become, I think. Under 2.6.26 you'd also, probably, just have a 
> > > "struct i2c_device_id *" member in your pca953x_chip.
> > 
> > Well, I was also pointing out that all you need is the number of GPIOs;
> > no need to save any ID struct at all.  These chips are VERY similar.
> 
> Ok, agreed, let's remove it then. For now I just use an array of structs 
> similar to i2c_device_id only to avoid a long sequence of strcmp calls in 
> probe() and compare the name in a loop. Is this alright?

Sure; it's your call on most such details, I just wanted clean patches.

_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
i2c-GZX6beZjE8VD60Wz+7aTrA@public.gmane.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c