From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com>
Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>, Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:30:42 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080716143042.GF24045@secretlab.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9e4733910807160724s136ef980weeeea2488ad7adf2@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:24:22AM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com> wrote:
> > Jon Smirl wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might
> > > > not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing
> > > > configurable through the property "probe" of the FDT I2C device node:
> > > >
> > >
> > > All this patch seems to be doing is removing class I2C_CLASS_HWMON via
> > > a device tree flag, PROBE.
>
> If this is implemented it shouldn't be a device tree option, it should
> be a compile time option in the Kconfig system. We don't want to
> pollute a platform independent device tree with Linux clutter.
I'm not sure about this. It is somewhat describing the hardware. It
sounds like it is saying "hey, I've got an i2c bus here, but I don't
know what is on it; so instead of providing a set of child nodes, you
should probe this bus to find out what it has".
I don't see any problem specifying it in the device tree.
Making it a Kconfig option forces *all* i2c busses on supported
platforms into either probe or no-probe mode. Not a multiplatform
friendly solution. Heck, we've got multiple i2c busses on some chips and
it is conceivable that only one would need to be probed.
Cheers,
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-16 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-16 10:47 [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT Wolfgang Grandegger
2008-07-16 12:05 ` Jean Delvare
2008-07-16 13:03 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2008-07-16 12:47 ` Jon Smirl
2008-07-16 13:09 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2008-07-16 14:11 ` Jon Smirl
2008-07-16 14:24 ` Jon Smirl
2008-07-16 14:30 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2008-07-16 14:42 ` Jon Smirl
2008-07-16 15:01 ` Timur Tabi
2008-07-16 14:24 ` Grant Likely
2008-07-16 14:48 ` Jochen Friedrich
2008-07-16 20:20 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2008-07-17 10:20 ` Is there relationship between address translation enabled and PLB timeout error? Evangelion
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=20080716143042.GF24045@secretlab.ca \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=jonsmirl@gmail.com \
--cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
/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).