linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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).