From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luis Oliveira Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: core: helper function to detect slave mode Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 17:46:33 +0000 Message-ID: References: <475d9c2a-da11-97d0-d0b6-37ccd4990f18@synopsys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtprelay.synopsys.com ([198.182.47.9]:52358 "EHLO smtprelay.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751622AbdAFRqi (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jan 2017 12:46:38 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-i2c-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Shevchenko , Luis Oliveira Cc: Wolfram Sang , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Jarkko Nikula , Andy Shevchenko , Mika Westerberg , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, devicetree , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Ramiro.Oliveira@synopsys.com, Joao Pinto , CARLOS.PALMINHA@synopsys.com On 06-Jan-17 17:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Luis Oliveira > wrote: >> On 06-Jan-17 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Luis Oliveira > >>> Please, add kernel doc description here, important thing is to explain >>> return codes in Return: section of it. >>> >>>> +int i2c_slave_mode_detect(struct device *dev) > > Just to make sure you didn't miss this one. > > Yes, I saw it. You were talking of something like this, right? /** * i2c_slave_mode_detect - detect operation mode * @dev: The device owning the bus * * This checks the device nodes for a I2C slave by checking the address * used. * * Returns true if a I2C slave is detected, otherwise returns false. */