public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Michael Hunold <hunold@convergence.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][2.6] Additional i2c adapter flags for i2c client isolation
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:14:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040316201426.1d01f1d3.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040316154454.GA13854@kroah.com>

> Yeah, right now it's up to the chip drivers to be honest.  If you want
> to implement a change to do this instead, I'll be glad to apply it.

Does this mean that i2c_client would get an additional ".class" struct
element, of the same nature of the ".class" struct element of
i2c_adapter?

This sounds interesting. That way, the "compatibility" check would move
down to i2c-core and neither the bus drivers nor the chip drivers would
have to care (apart from defining this .class element). Sounds really
nice indeed.

I guess that chip drivers would be allowed to define only one class
while adapters could possibly define more than one?

We also would want to introduce an I2C_ADAP_CLASS_ANY define, which
would be what the eeprom driver would use, for example (since it can be
hosted on any kind of bus). Generic bus drivers such as i2c-parport
would also use I2C_ADAP_CLASS_ANY, since the nature of the hosted chips
is unknown.

Having clients define a class sounds also interesting from a
user-space's point of view. If we would export this information through
sysfs for example, programs such as "sensors" could limit their work to
chips of the correct class (I2C_ADAP_CLASS_SMBUS at the moment, but a
renaming is planned).

-- 
Jean Delvare
http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/

  reply	other threads:[~2004-03-16 19:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-03-16  9:25 [RFC][2.6] Additional i2c adapter flags for i2c client isolation Michael Hunold
2004-03-16 13:26 ` Adrian Cox
2004-03-16 14:23   ` Michael Hunold
2004-03-16 15:44 ` Greg KH
2004-03-16 19:14   ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2004-03-16 19:53     ` Greg KH
2004-03-17  9:17       ` Jean Delvare
2004-03-17 17:42         ` Greg KH
2004-03-17 20:05           ` Jean Delvare
2004-03-17 23:11             ` Greg KH
2004-03-18 15:56   ` Michael Hunold

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=20040316201426.1d01f1d3.khali@linux-fr.org \
    --to=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=hunold@convergence.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.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