Re: [PATCH] mfd: da9063: occupy second I2C address, too

[Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>]

On Sun, 01 Jun 2025, Wolfram Sang wrote:

> Even though we don't use it yet, we should mark the second I2C address
> this device is listening to as used.

Could we have a bit more information please?

What happens if we don't do this?

> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
> Reviewed-by: Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>
> Reviewed-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
> Reviewed-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
> ---
> 
> This patch could not be applied 6 years ago because of a missing
> dependency. It has arrived meanwhile ;)
> 
>  drivers/mfd/da9063-i2c.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9063-i2c.c b/drivers/mfd/da9063-i2c.c
> index c6235cd0dbdc..c74702cf8a77 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/da9063-i2c.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/da9063-i2c.c
> @@ -454,6 +454,8 @@ static int da9063_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *i2c)
>  		}
>  	}

Maybe a comment for future readers wondering why we're obtaining this
unused I2C address.  It may prevent others from removing it as
superfluous.

> +	devm_i2c_new_dummy_device(&i2c->dev, i2c->adapter, i2c->addr + 1);
> +
>  	return da9063_device_init(da9063, i2c->irq);
>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.47.2
> 

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]