Re: [PATCH RESEND v2] hw/i2c: Enable an id for the pca954x devices

["Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@linaro.org>]

Hi Patrick,

On 31/5/23 18:34, Patrick Venture wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 2:40 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé 
> <philmd@linaro.org <mailto:philmd@linaro.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On 22/3/23 22:19, Corey Minyard wrote:
>      > On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 10:21:36AM -0700, Patrick Venture wrote:
>      >> This allows the devices to be more readily found and specified.
>      >> Without setting the name field, they can only be found by device
>     type
>      >> name, which doesn't let you specify the second of the same
>     device type
>      >> behind a bus.
>      >>
>      >> Tested: Verified that by default the device was findable with
>     the name
>      >> 'pca954x[77]', for an instance attached at that address.
>      >
>      > This looks good to me.
>      >
>      > Acked-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@mvista.com
>     <mailto:cminyard@mvista.com>>
>      >
>      > if you are taking this in through another tree.  Or do you want me to
>      > take this?
> 
>     Since I have to send a MIPS PR, I'll take this one;
>     to alleviate you and the CI minutes.
> 
> 
> I don't see this patch yet, did it got lost in the shuffle?

I quickly tried to test the patch before sending the PR and it was not
working, so I dropped it; but since it was a busy day I neglected to
post an update on the list. I apologize for that.

Revisiting the patch, the problem is trivial, a simple typo:

  +static Property pca954x_props[] = {
  +    DEFINE_PROP_STRING("nane", Pca954xState, name),
                           ^^^^
  +    DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST()
  +};

I'm queuing this patch again with s/nane/name/.

Regards,

Phil.