From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: "Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>,
i2c@lm-sensors.org, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: Add devtree-aware iic support for PPC4xx
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:19:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071016211939.250c2da4@hyperion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa686aa40710152121o2fe0d7c9m156170901fd3bf98@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:21:38 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> On 10/15/07, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> > In fact I think it may be acceptle to do the idx++ thing in this
> > situation. Bus numbers are ugly, but it's not the worst ugliness in
> > the horrible mess that is the Linux i2c subsystem. It means that bus
> > numbers are theoretically unstable, but that's increasingly true of
> > devices of all sorts - it's up to udev to assign meaningful labels at
> > the user level.
David, after such a rant against the Linux i2c subsystem, I sure hope
that you're going to contribute patches to make it better (whatever you
think needs to be improved, as you didn't say.)
> I think the real problem here comes into play when there are 2 types
> of i2c busses in the system. If they both maintain their own idx++
> values; then they will conflict. If an auto assigned bus number is
> used; then it needs to be assigned by the i2c infrastructure; not by
> the driver.
Very true. If you aren't going to define the i2c bus numbers at
platform data level, then you shouldn't be defining them _at all_.
Don't use i2c_add_numbered_adapter, use i2c_add_adapter and let
i2c-core choose an appropriate a bus number.
--
Jean Delvare
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-16 19:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-15 13:29 [PATCH 2/2] i2c: Add devtree-aware iic support for PPC4xx Stefan Roese
2007-10-15 16:32 ` Eugene Surovegin
2007-10-15 16:57 ` Grant Likely
2007-10-15 18:53 ` Scott Wood
2007-10-15 19:11 ` Eugene Surovegin
2007-10-15 19:16 ` Grant Likely
2007-10-15 19:18 ` Scott Wood
2007-10-15 19:13 ` Grant Likely
2007-10-15 19:24 ` Scott Wood
2007-10-15 19:48 ` Grant Likely
2007-10-15 19:54 ` Scott Wood
2007-10-15 20:26 ` Grant Likely
2007-10-15 20:45 ` Scott Wood
2007-10-16 3:20 ` David Gibson
2007-10-16 4:21 ` Grant Likely
2007-10-16 19:19 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2007-10-17 0:37 ` David Gibson
2007-10-15 16:46 ` Grant Likely
2007-10-19 11:56 ` Valentine Barshak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071016211939.250c2da4@hyperion.delvare \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=i2c@lm-sensors.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=sr@denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).