From: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
To: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>
Cc: Felipe Balbi <me@felipebalbi.com>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, i2c@lm-sensors.org
Subject: Re: [i2c] N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:43:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080722134314.GC8318@fluff.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080722133742.GA7492@kos.to>
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 04:37:42PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 07:52:44AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:47:43 +0300, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi> wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm. I think it would be better to avoid calling the probe
> > > in first place. git diff made the attached patch look more
> > > confusing than it actually is. Personally I'd eliminate
> > > all ifdefs from those i2c_board_info structs.
>
> > I did the same thing before, but then we're gonna start adding
> > several i2c_board_info for different hw. I mean, we should
> > just reuse the code and the driver should know when the device
> > is not present and stop probing without any problems to the rest
> > of the system.
>
> If the different hw has different devices on the i2c bus, then
> different i2c_board_info struct should be provided. IIRC i2c_board_info
> is expected to provide a accurate picture of what i2c devices is
> connected to the bus. This has been used as a argument to remove detection
> code from .probe functions.
>
> To all the confused i2c list readers, the topic is about should we
> split n800_i2c_board_info_2 [0] to n800 and n810 specific structs[1]
> or make the lm8323 configure to err out earlier[2].
Split them into a common and then machine specfic structures, you are
allowed to register more than one board per bus.
> [0] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/tmlind/linux-omap-2.6.git;a=blob;f=arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-n800.c;h=ae85c2c60534820856c8bb0e019be29f2375470b;hb=HEAD#l645
> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/9562
> [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/9522
>
>
> "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups
>
> _______________________________________________
> i2c mailing list
> i2c@lm-sensors.org
> http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
--
Ben (ben@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)
'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-22 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-22 12:47 N800 problems with MMC, LM8323 on current linux-omap git head Riku Voipio
2008-07-22 12:52 ` Felipe Balbi
2008-07-22 13:37 ` Riku Voipio
2008-07-22 13:43 ` Ben Dooks [this message]
2008-07-22 14:20 ` [i2c] " Felipe Balbi
2008-07-23 9:38 ` Riku Voipio
2008-07-23 10:10 ` Felipe Balbi
2008-08-04 14:42 ` Tony Lindgren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080722134314.GC8318@fluff.org.uk \
--to=ben-linux@fluff.org \
--cc=i2c@lm-sensors.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=me@felipebalbi.com \
--cc=riku.voipio@iki.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.