From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] ASoC: da9055: Fix device registration of PMIC and CODEC devices Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:51:09 +0000 Message-ID: <20140210115109.GC22773@lee--X1> References: <6a398d176b0b2bf8792d27bd5e2995fd96afb32d.1391705989.git.Adam.Thomson.Opensource@diasemi.com> <20140207105657.GL14727@lee--X1> <20140207125831.GL32298@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140207125831.GL32298@sirena.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Adam Thomson , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Linus Walleij , Dmitry Torokhov , Alessandro Zummo , Guenter Roeck List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > > +/* > > > + * DO NOT change the device Ids. The naming is intentionally spe= cific as both > > > + * the PMIC and CODEC parts of this chip are instantiated separa= tely as I2C > > > + * devices (both have configurable I2C addresses, and are to all= intents and > > > + * purposes separate). As a result there are specific DA9055 ids= for PMIC > > > + * and CODEC, which must be different to operate together. > > > + */ >=20 > > I'm not sure this comment is required. >=20 > They are, we've already had the suffixes removed from both PMIC and > CODEC drivers by people doing code review causing the drivers to fail= to > load for several kernel releases (this should be tagged to stable as = a > result). >=20 > > Most device IDs are named this way. >=20 > Having the suffix on a subdevice would be normal but it's not normal = for > the primary I2C device, usually you can just put the part number in. Okay, no problem then. Ignore my last. --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog