Re: Dynamically-allocated i2c_device_id vs MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE

[Timur Tabi <timur-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>]

Mark Brown wrote:

> Really what
> you're having to do here is fairly nasty and there's no good reason for
> it to be supported - if something is being registered dynamically and
> passing instantiation specific data around it really should be the
> device and not the driver.

What we need is a way for the codec driver to do its stuff without needing a 
socdev.

I think I see your point, though.  I'm calling i2c_add_driver, which 
technically could result in my i2c_probe function being called multiple times, 
if there are multiple matches in the device tree.  I'll have to check that out 
on Monday.

 > The fact that attempting to do this looks
> bad is a win on the part of the I2C core.
>
> For now an idiomatic solution for ASoC drivers is to have a single
> static variable that you use to get the socdev through.

Well, that's what I do today.  I was hoping to avoid that, but if I'm right 
about i2c_add_driver, then this trick doesn't really work either.

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux Kernel Developer @ Freescale