From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bo Shen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: change the id to let the i2c-gpio work Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:26:36 +0800 Message-ID: <507BC8BC.8000608@atmel.com> References: <1350034971-1050-1-git-send-email-voice.shen@atmel.com> <507B7066.4060802@atmel.com> <507BC57B.8050607@atmel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <507BC57B.8050607-AIFe0yeh4nAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Nicolas Ferre Cc: Joachim Eastwood , n.voss-+umVssTZoCsb1SvskN2V4Q@public.gmane.org, hskinnemoen-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, broonie-yzvPICuk2AATkU/dhu1WVueM+bqZidxxQQ4Iyu8u01E@public.gmane.org, plagnioj-sclMFOaUSTBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Hi Nicolas, On 10/15/2012 16:12, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > On 10/15/2012 04:09 AM, Bo Shen : >> Hi Joachim Eastwood, >> >> On 10/13/2012 1:42, Joachim Eastwood wrote: >>> Hi Bo Shen, >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bo Shen wrote: >>>> The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. >>>> When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned >>>> the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, >>>> and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device >>>> if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. >>>> >>>> In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number >>>> Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). >>> >>> I have been bitten by this myself on RM9200. >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bo Shen >>>> --- >>>> Change since v1 >>>> Make the commit message more clear >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- >>> >>> This pattern exist in at91rm9200_devices.c, at91sam9261_devices.c, >>> at91sam9263_devices.c and at91sam9rl_devices.c you might want to fix >>> them as well. >> >> Thanks for your information. >> After I test these boards, I will send patches to fix them, while not in >> this patch. > > I am in favor of doing a comprehensive patch series that covers all > aspects of this issue: > - each boards > - both i2c-gpio and i2c-at91 cases May I need to submit this patch as a series? One patch for one board, and cover i2c-gpio and i2c-at91 cases. e.g: [patch 1/x] i2c: change id to let i2c-gpio work on at91rm200ek [patch 2/x] i2c: change id to let i2c-gpio work on at91sam9261ek ... or Just one patch, cover all these boards and i2c-gpio and i2c-at91? > Bye, >