From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: Mark instantiated device nodes with OF_POPULATE Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 22:29:52 +0200 Message-ID: <20150709202952.GQ4744@katana> References: <1422083789-18905-1-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> <20150422074019.GA1511@katana> <20150506183733.GA1513@katana> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="SvyA5ywaG/v2A5dH" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150506183733.GA1513@katana> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Kevin Hilman Cc: Pantelis Antoniou , Guenter Roeck , Matt Porter , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Pantelis Antoniou List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --SvyA5ywaG/v2A5dH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 08:37:33PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 10:51:07AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Wolfram Sang wrot= e: > > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 09:16:29AM +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > > >> Mark (and unmark) device nodes with the POPULATE flag as appropriate. > > >> This is required to avoid multi probing when using I2C and device > > >> overlays containing a mux. > > >> This patch is also more careful with the release of the adapter devi= ce > > >> which caused a deadlock with muxes, and does not break the build > > >> on !OF since the node flag accessors are not defined then. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou > > > > > > Now, that the dependency is upstream: applied to for-current, thanks! > >=20 > > I'm not seeing this in linux-next, or in your for-current branch. > >=20 > > Was this dropped or superseded by something else? >=20 > I dropped it because it caused a build bug. So, we need another > dependency in... I am not sure if this is already in. Applied to for-current AGAIN, let's hope it will work this time... --SvyA5ywaG/v2A5dH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVntnAAAoJEBQN5MwUoCm2m/UQAIfTPxmbFXNN93x5sV0MU3I3 fZZrl9h4/FpGcAB7MljSxJ1NdqVwp/CRJ+dAo8tm6EXpn26G3GHeUVs9oXMLqko8 V3PRLcaJ5Es4NR893B73GWWryloYz0tabDZeTYFQ6q0/oap11DPArWAFW0LE2W/1 rq2tHFP76TUDyHCJ/Kiy73V2SebeYYBLENkn5SsNEAU+BUtwOo6iv8bkKrjSlsqM iB0zZtQNfQNr0DL2XSP7JyES/mi061FujKCtZ3YWodFUDbtjDrynJfeFAIPkJ83u +GhtydFy9uslIK163D7ZZ4a126mB1dm+aD527gmsKTrRkAnRLeH1ZQe41wCGwTu2 JfzSriW7LuXIBOmDS6mS3g1z2na29tzrnK1xuRICZ2JX68x9eZ+fdPKFdR+DZzhS rIkb1z+Z7VYjiMl+18W26tH6CGD6UyOgewlLtgW7Vh4/Hd9iJXrzjWXCHGjlhOiD H0v5Q2SNLk+XzdZRzeAbHD9/7/o++XsFuQiQ8CUuEGM8LMO1VOP1RhDZXEjKehmp em5Lf16ixSmZ2DSBuWvkqrK5kmM6ABwikzd+BJRcV53ZjmW2W8fi/HJMm7M5CIj8 eA/aFIdfS/JO/bpaZVvOAsBxOL1qf7arMoQS8HWhWlbew1TNnGru4AL5UMVEa5MT NwqnsG6MOPHUnTDv6txD =4G+W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SvyA5ywaG/v2A5dH--