From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 16:36:00 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: S3C6410: Use device names for both I2C clocks In-Reply-To: References: <1320768593-21010-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <20111108163600.GF5632@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 09:57:56PM +0530, Thomas Abraham wrote: > On 8 November 2011 21:39, Mark Brown > > +#ifdef CONFIG_S3C_DEV_I2C1 > > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? .devname ? ? ? ?= "s3c2440-i2c.0", > > +#else > > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? .devname ? ? ? ?= "s3c2440-i2c", > > +#endif > The #ifdef around the id of the s3c_device_i2c0 structure in > arch/arm/plat-samsung/devs.c file can be removed and id can be fixed > as 0. And devname "s3c2440-i2c.0" can be assigned above without the > #ifdef. Will there be any issues in using .id as 0 even if there is > only one instance of i2c? That would be much nicer from my point of view but it's much more invasive as this device is used by a whole raft of other SoCs, not all of which have more than one I2C controller and I don't really feel like changing the idiom over the entire Samsung SoC family right now.