From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183]:42757 "EHLO smtp.gentoo.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750998AbaJBFQc (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Oct 2014 01:16:32 -0400 Message-ID: <542CDFAC.1030701@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 07:16:28 +0200 From: Matthias Schwarzott MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Antti Palosaari , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@osg.samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 04/13] cx231xx: give each master i2c bus a seperate name References: <1412140821-16285-1-git-send-email-zzam@gentoo.org> <1412140821-16285-5-git-send-email-zzam@gentoo.org> <542C5462.5090406@iki.fi> In-Reply-To: <542C5462.5090406@iki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01.10.2014 21:22, Antti Palosaari wrote: > > > On 10/01/2014 08:20 AM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Matthias Schwarzott >> --- >> drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-i2c.c | 5 +++++ >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-i2c.c >> b/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-i2c.c >> index a30d400..178fa48 100644 >> --- a/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-i2c.c >> +++ b/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-i2c.c >> @@ -506,6 +506,7 @@ void cx231xx_do_i2c_scan(struct cx231xx *dev, int >> i2c_port) >> int cx231xx_i2c_register(struct cx231xx_i2c *bus) >> { >> struct cx231xx *dev = bus->dev; >> + char bus_name[3]; >> >> BUG_ON(!dev->cx231xx_send_usb_command); >> >> @@ -513,6 +514,10 @@ int cx231xx_i2c_register(struct cx231xx_i2c *bus) >> bus->i2c_adap.dev.parent = &dev->udev->dev; >> >> strlcpy(bus->i2c_adap.name, bus->dev->name, >> sizeof(bus->i2c_adap.name)); >> + bus_name[0] = '-'; >> + bus_name[1] = '0' + bus->nr; >> + bus_name[2] = '\0'; >> + strlcat(bus->i2c_adap.name, bus_name, sizeof(bus->i2c_adap.name)); > > I am still thinking that. Isn't there any better alternative for this > kind homemade number to string conversion? It is trivial, but for > something on my head says we should avoid that kind of string > manipulation... > > printf? num_to_str? > I switched to snprintf. Regards Matthias