From: Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa-z923LK4zBo2bacvFa/9K2g@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,
linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,
linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT'ed and/or ACPI'ed devices
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 13:55:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140530125543.GA29731@lee--X1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140530123656.GC2742@katana>
On Fri, 30 May 2014, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 01:26:36PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Currently the I2C framework insists on devices supplying an I2C ID
> > table. Many of the devices which do so unnecessarily adding quite a
> > few wasted lines to kernel code. This patch allows drivers a means
> > to 'not' supply the aforementioned table and match on either DT
> > and/or ACPI match tables instead.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>
> Sadly, it is not that easy...
>
> > + /*
> > + * An I2C ID table is not madatory, if and only if, a suitable Device
> > + * Tree and/or ACPI match table entry is supplied for the probing
> > + * device.
> > + */
>
> That means we end up with drivers which cannot be used for run-time
> instantiation via the 'new_device'-file in sysfs. I don't like that.
Would you mind explaining that a little please? And perhaps point me
to the code?
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT'ed and/or ACPI'ed devices
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 13:55:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140530125543.GA29731@lee--X1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140530123656.GC2742@katana>
On Fri, 30 May 2014, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 01:26:36PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Currently the I2C framework insists on devices supplying an I2C ID
> > table. Many of the devices which do so unnecessarily adding quite a
> > few wasted lines to kernel code. This patch allows drivers a means
> > to 'not' supply the aforementioned table and match on either DT
> > and/or ACPI match tables instead.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>
> Sadly, it is not that easy...
>
> > + /*
> > + * An I2C ID table is not madatory, if and only if, a suitable Device
> > + * Tree and/or ACPI match table entry is supplied for the probing
> > + * device.
> > + */
>
> That means we end up with drivers which cannot be used for run-time
> instantiation via the 'new_device'-file in sysfs. I don't like that.
Would you mind explaining that a little please? And perhaps point me
to the code?
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, grant.likely@linaro.org,
linus.walleij@linaro.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT'ed and/or ACPI'ed devices
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 13:55:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140530125543.GA29731@lee--X1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140530123656.GC2742@katana>
On Fri, 30 May 2014, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 01:26:36PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Currently the I2C framework insists on devices supplying an I2C ID
> > table. Many of the devices which do so unnecessarily adding quite a
> > few wasted lines to kernel code. This patch allows drivers a means
> > to 'not' supply the aforementioned table and match on either DT
> > and/or ACPI match tables instead.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>
> Sadly, it is not that easy...
>
> > + /*
> > + * An I2C ID table is not madatory, if and only if, a suitable Device
> > + * Tree and/or ACPI match table entry is supplied for the probing
> > + * device.
> > + */
>
> That means we end up with drivers which cannot be used for run-time
> instantiation via the 'new_device'-file in sysfs. I don't like that.
Would you mind explaining that a little please? And perhaps point me
to the code?
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-30 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-30 12:26 [PATCH 0/{1,1}] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT/ACPI Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:26 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:26 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:26 ` [PATCH] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT'ed and/or ACPI'ed devices Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:26 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:36 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-30 12:36 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-30 12:55 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2014-05-30 12:55 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:55 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 13:34 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 13:34 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 13:34 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 17:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-30 17:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-30 17:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-30 19:25 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 19:25 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-31 13:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-31 13:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-31 13:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-06-02 12:16 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-02 12:16 ` Linus Walleij
[not found] ` <CACRpkdZvyfA0aaJe3YuevXfA2pTZLRPZ3mQpitL6qD7=qE0Xyg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2014-06-02 12:38 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-06-02 12:38 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-06-02 12:38 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-06-02 13:26 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-02 13:26 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-02 13:26 ` Lee Jones
2014-06-02 13:26 ` Lee Jones
2014-06-02 14:29 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-06-02 14:29 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-06-02 14:29 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-06-03 11:18 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-03 11:18 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-04 6:09 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-06-04 6:09 ` Michael Lawnick
[not found] ` <538EB81B.3090807-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>
2014-06-12 7:55 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-12 7:55 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-12 7:55 ` Linus Walleij
[not found] ` <CACRpkda3bL=y3Dmkf59LT97Liep=XEzgE3P-YngLeD_w1qcAzQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2014-06-12 9:28 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-06-12 9:28 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-06-12 9:28 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-05-30 12:26 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:26 ` Lee Jones
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=20140530125543.GA29731@lee--X1 \
--to=lee.jones-qsej5fyqhm4dnm+yrofe0a@public.gmane.org \
--cc=grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linus.walleij-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=wsa-z923LK4zBo2bacvFa/9K2g@public.gmane.org \
/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.