From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Sealey Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add device tree compatible aliases to i2c drivers Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:18:47 +0000 Message-ID: <4797A127.8070401@genesi-usa.com> References: <20080123020912.31675.48787.stgit@terra.home> <20080123020916.31675.98481.stgit@terra.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080123020916.31675.98481.stgit@terra.home> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linuxppc-dev-bounces+glppd-linuxppc64-dev=m.gmane.org@ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+glppd-linuxppc64-dev=m.gmane.org@ozlabs.org To: Jon Smirl Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, i2c@lm-sensors.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Jon Smirl wrote: > --- a/drivers/i2c/chips/tps65010.c > +++ b/drivers/i2c/chips/tps65010.c > @@ -571,6 +571,10 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id tps65010_id[] = { > { "tps65011", TPS65011 }, > { "tps65012", TPS65012 }, > { "tps65013", TPS65013 }, > + OF_ID("ti,tps65010", TPS65010) > + OF_ID("ti,tps65011", TPS65011) > + OF_ID("ti,tps65012", TPS65012) > + OF_ID("ri,tps65013", TPS65013) > { }, ti, ti, ti, ri? > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1307.c > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1307.c > @@ -129,6 +129,12 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id ds1307_id[] = { > { "ds1339", ds_1339 }, > { "ds1340", ds_1340 }, > { "m41t00", m41t00 }, > + OF_ID("dallas,ds1307", ds_1307) > + OF_ID("dallas,ds1337", ds_1337) > + OF_ID("dallas,ds1338", ds_1338) > + OF_ID("dallas,ds1339", ds_1339) > + OF_ID("dallas,ds1340", ds_1340) > + OF_ID("stm,m41t00", m41t00) > {}, > }; The convention is to use the stock ticker, capitalized, if a company has one, I guess dallas is MXIM these days, but dallas is a good substitute based on the fact that most people still remember Dallas clock chips and so on from the Ancient Days. STMicroelectronics is STM. I couldn't care less about case sensitivity, but the stock ticker thing was always a good idea.. it gives a sort of grounding in reality for the manufacturer names. Are we still following this convention or are the names of devices simply arbitrarily defined by Linux kernel developers now? -- Matt Sealey Genesi, Manager, Developer Relations