From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Michael Hunold <hunold-ml@web.de>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][2.6] Add command function to struct i2c_adapter
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 20:05:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040924200503.652ccf8e.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41545421.5080408@web.de>
> We like to have an completly isolated i2c adapter, where the device
> driver can invite i2c drivers to connect an i2c client to. When the
> connection is made, an "interface" pointer with client-specific data
> or function pointers can be provided.
> (...)
> - add a new NO_PROBE flag to struct i2c_adapter, so a particular
> adapter is never probed by anyone
I don't get it. If the adapter is isolated, there is no way the i2c-core
will probe it anyway. As Adrian Cox underlined, it should be far easier
and more efficient to separate these adapters from the main i2c adapters
list from the beginning than leaving them in the main list and then try
and prevent future probings using a flag.
Also, how does this proposal interact with the work on the i2c classes?
Although the classes carry more information than a simple flag or a
complete separation, both were/may be introduced to achieve the same
goal, isn't it?
Thanks,
--
Jean "Khali" Delvare
http://khali.linux-fr.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-24 18:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-20 17:19 [PATCH][2.6] Add command function to struct i2c_adapter Michael Hunold
2004-09-21 15:41 ` Greg KH
2004-09-21 17:10 ` Michael Hunold
2004-09-21 17:39 ` Jon Smirl
2004-09-21 18:05 ` Michael Hunold
2004-09-22 8:56 ` Adrian Cox
2004-09-22 12:08 ` Jean Delvare
2004-09-22 11:54 ` Adrian Cox
2004-09-22 13:38 ` Jean Delvare
2004-09-22 13:13 ` Adrian Cox
2004-09-22 15:40 ` Jon Smirl
2004-09-22 15:56 ` Adrian Cox
2004-09-22 16:07 ` Jon Smirl
2004-09-22 16:51 ` Adrian Cox
2004-09-22 17:17 ` Jon Smirl
2004-09-22 18:55 ` Jean Delvare
2004-09-22 18:32 ` Adrian Cox
2004-09-22 20:04 ` Mark M. Hoffman
2004-09-23 7:41 ` Michael Hunold
2004-09-23 7:48 ` Michael Hunold
2004-09-23 7:09 ` Michael Hunold
2004-09-23 20:18 ` Adrian Cox
2004-09-21 20:33 ` Jean Delvare
2004-09-21 21:02 ` Jon Smirl
2004-09-24 17:06 ` Michael Hunold
2004-09-24 18:05 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2004-09-24 20:21 ` Michael Hunold
2004-10-01 6:52 ` Greg KH
2004-10-01 12:22 ` Adrian Cox
2004-10-01 13:57 ` Jean Delvare
2004-10-01 23:41 ` Greg KH
[not found] <41500BED.8090607@linuxtv.org>
2004-09-21 13:28 ` Jean Delvare
2004-09-21 14:38 ` 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=20040924200503.652ccf8e.khali@linux-fr.org \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=hunold-ml@web.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