linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, i2c@lm-sensors.org
Subject: Re: [i2c] [PATCH 3/5] powerpc: Document device nodes for I2C devices.
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:33:48 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <79CACFC8-DD5B-4284-AC2E-C92FE2A85330@kernel.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <464DDFA5.6050106@freescale.com>


On May 18, 2007, at 12:17 PM, Scott Wood wrote:

> Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On May 18, 2007, at 11:35 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>
>>>> I guess my gripe is about proposing a solution and not willing  
>>>> to   extend it in light of people providing issues with it.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm perfectly willing to extend it if you let me know what you   
>>> think is needed, rather than just saying "switches and muxes".    
>>> What *specifically* would they need beyond what I proposed?
>> I provided you an example device and asked you to explain how it   
>> would be described in what you are proposing.
>
> And I did.  What did you find lacking in the device tree fragment I  
> suggested?

Once you expand the beyond just a root node for the controller I'd  
like to see how you suggest we handle the case where a particular  
child ends up having children as well.  You example, is sufficient  
the majority of devices, but I'd like to know that we'll be able to  
handle the case where a node is both a device and controller.

>> I never said don't bother because you didn't cover the switch/mux   
>> case.  I said don't bother because I don't see what the value is   
>> creating a namespace that no one is going to manage and thus will  
>> end  up most likely being linux specific, and linux already  
>> provides a  solution for the problem.
>
> Given that power.org is attempting to do further standardization of  
> the device tree for embedded applications, I'd be surprised if  
> there weren't a way we could have them act as a registry.

If/when they sign up for this I'd be more inclined to have kernel  
support for it.

>> For I2C specifically we already have both a dynamic way (kernel  
>> cmd  line) and static (i2c_board_info) to specify the i2c devices,  
>> why do  we need yet another?
>
> This uses i2c_board_info; it doesn't replace it.

Ok, but what functionality does it give us that we dont already have  
today?

- k

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-18 17:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-17 14:38 [PATCH 3/5] powerpc: Document device nodes for I2C devices Scott Wood
2007-05-17 16:12 ` Kumar Gala
2007-05-17 16:17   ` Scott Wood
2007-05-17 16:39     ` Kumar Gala
2007-05-17 16:47       ` Scott Wood
2007-05-17 17:21         ` Kumar Gala
2007-05-17 18:29           ` Scott Wood
2007-05-18 15:15           ` [i2c] " Jean Delvare
2007-05-18 16:24             ` Kumar Gala
2007-05-18 16:35               ` Scott Wood
2007-05-18 17:10                 ` Kumar Gala
2007-05-18 17:17                   ` Scott Wood
2007-05-18 17:33                     ` Kumar Gala [this message]
2007-05-18 17:55                       ` Scott Wood
2007-05-20 11:53                         ` Jean Delvare
2007-05-21 14:57                           ` Scott Wood
2007-05-19  0:04                   ` Matt Sealey
2007-05-19  0:17                     ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-19 13:41                       ` Matt Sealey
2007-05-19 16:25                         ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-20 14:53                           ` Matt Sealey
2007-05-20 15:48                             ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-27  9:48                               ` Matt Sealey
2007-05-20 11:42                   ` Jean Delvare
2007-05-18 20:07             ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-17 19:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-17 19:32   ` Scott Wood
2007-05-17 19:44     ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-05-17 21:15       ` Scott Wood
2007-05-18 15:27     ` [i2c] " Jean Delvare
2007-05-18 15:58       ` Scott Wood
2007-05-18 16:29         ` Kumar Gala
2007-05-18 16:31         ` Jean Delvare
2007-05-18 16:56           ` Kumar Gala
2007-05-18 19:00           ` David Brownell
2007-05-18 15:19   ` Jean Delvare

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=79CACFC8-DD5B-4284-AC2E-C92FE2A85330@kernel.crashing.org \
    --to=galak@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=i2c@lm-sensors.org \
    --cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
    /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).