From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Nikula Subject: Re: [RFC] i2c: Revert back to old device naming for ACPI enumerated I2C slaves Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 12:27:16 +0300 Message-ID: <560E4DF4.4000901@linux.intel.com> References: <1440413522-7855-1-git-send-email-jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> <20151001203744.GA7514@katana> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151001203744.GA7514@katana> Sender: linux-i2c-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, Mark Brown , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Jean Delvare , Liam Girdwood , Dustin Byford , linux@roeck-us.net List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 10/01/2015 11:37 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> This is for discussion so I didn't cc stable@vger.kernel.org yet. I was >> thinking would it work if we'd keep the stable name but have an another >> symlink in /sys/bus/i2c/devices/ that uses "x-00yz" name. However this >> feels ill-use of devices directory and probably causes more troubles >> elsewhere. > > Do you foresee troubles already? I am still in favour of a symlink. > I haven't looked at this for a while but one problem was that devices/ directory belongs to private structure of struct bus_type and in order to create a symlink there it needs to done in drivers/base/bus.c: bus_add_device() which felt quite hackish to me. -- Jarkko