From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT'ed and/or ACPI'ed devices
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 14:26:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140602132619.GA4146@lee--X1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140602123851.GB2654@katana>
On Mon, 02 Jun 2014, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 02:16:59PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Right, I read the function which provides the functionality, but my
> > >> point is; I don't think my patch changes the semantics in a way which
> > >> would adversely affect this option. If you think that it does, can you
> > >> specify how please?
> > >
> > > Currently, if a driver would be DT only and does not provide a seperate
> > > i2c_device_id table, then the driver is unusable with method 4. I don't
> > > like to have some drivers being capable of it and some not.
> > >
> > >> Does the sysfs method create a i2c_device_id table? If not, how does
> > >> it probe successfully pre-patch?
> > >
> > > The sysfs method creates a device. Its name is matched against
> > > i2c_device_ids only since it does not have a node pointer for DT to be
> > > matched against.
> >
> > Is this really so useful on embedded systems?
>
> Well, this feature is at least nice with embedded:
>
> ---
>
> * You are developing a driver on a test board, where you soldered the I2C
> device yourself.
>
> ---
>
> Or during HW bringup, you this or that driver for a device (out-of-tree
> vs. in-kernel), and hey, the RTC even has an EEPROM at another address,
> let's try. Such things are the use cases I have mostly seen and those
> customers liked it.
>
> The problem is that we are talking about matching against I2C slave
> drivers. I can't see a line between embedded and non-embedded when it
> comes to slaves. They are just slaves and could be on any hardware.
> Keeping the bigger picture in mind, IMO it is cumbersome if some drivers
> support user-space instantiation and some not.
>
> Though, I wouldn't mind if compatible entries could be passed to the
> 'new_device' file, in addition to i2c_device_ids. Yet, this needs some
> extra handling I haven't found the time for, yet.
Actually, I'm just about to submit a new set.
Hopefully we cover some bases.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-02 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-30 12:26 [PATCH 0/{1,1}] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT/ACPI Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:26 ` [PATCH] i2c: Make I2C ID tables non-mandatory for DT'ed and/or ACPI'ed devices Lee Jones
2014-05-30 12:36 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-30 12:55 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 13:34 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-30 17:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-05-30 19:25 ` Lee Jones
2014-05-31 13:48 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-06-02 12:16 ` Linus Walleij
[not found] ` <CACRpkdZvyfA0aaJe3YuevXfA2pTZLRPZ3mQpitL6qD7=qE0Xyg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2014-06-02 12:38 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-06-02 13:26 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-02 13:26 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2014-06-02 14:29 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-06-03 11:18 ` Linus Walleij
2014-06-04 6:09 ` Michael Lawnick
[not found] ` <538EB81B.3090807-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>
2014-06-12 7:55 ` Linus Walleij
[not found] ` <CACRpkda3bL=y3Dmkf59LT97Liep=XEzgE3P-YngLeD_w1qcAzQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2014-06-12 9:28 ` Michael Lawnick
2014-05-30 12:26 ` Lee Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140602132619.GA4146@lee--X1 \
--to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).