Re: [PATCH] i2c: Fix modalias for ACPI enumerated I2C devices

[Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>]

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 09:45:53AM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On 10/12/2013 07:18 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> >If we have two ACPI enumerated devices, they have following modalias:
> >
> >   i2c-device0:	i2c:INTABCD:00
> >		acpi:INTABCD
> >
> >   i2c-device1:	i2c:INTABCD:01
> >   		acpi:INTABCD
> >
> >Likelihood that some random I2C driver has INTABCD:00 or INTABCD:01 ids in
> >their list is minimal. However, when you turn it to this:
> >
> >
> >   i2c-device0:	i2c:INTABCD
> >		acpi:INTABCD
> >
> >   i2c-device1:	i2c:INTABCD
> >   		acpi:INTABCD
> >
> >It might be possible that we get a match that isn't supposed to happen.
> >Well, OK it is pretty remote but anyway :-)
> Well, name conflicts could occur of course but still I don't think
> we should generate illegal or wrong modaliases. I'm not an udev
> expert but I suppose trying to load nonexisting drivers
> (i2c_INTABCD:xy) could slow booting a little and perhaps pollute
> needlessly error log compared to if it can see that driver is
> already loaded or tries to load the same driver again.
> 
> I don't think name conflicts can pose too big risk as they are
> trivial to fix in sources and can be queued to stable too.

OK, you got me convinced :-)

No further objections from me.