[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: mux: add device tree support
    On 04/23/2012 05:15 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
    > On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:49:04PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
    >> From: Stephen Warren <>
    >> * Define core portions of the DT binding for I2C bus muxes.
    >> * Enhance i2c_add_mux_adapter():
    >> ** Add parameters required for DT support. Update all callers.
    >> ** Set the appropriate adap->dev.of_node for the child bus.
    >> ** Call of_i2c_register_devices() for the child bus.
    >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <>
    > David Daney (CCed) posted another variant [1]. Just looking at the
    > patches (and not really using them), I tend to like the approach using
    > <reg> better. But I am open for discussion, so I'd appreciate your
    > feedback.
    > Regards,
    > Wolfram
    > [1]

    Ah, that does look like a reasonable binding.

    I had meant to call out to reviewers the potentially unusual use of
    explicitly named sub-nodes, rather than using the usual reg-based matching.

    The main reason I chose named sub-nodes for the busses was so the
    sub-nodes would match the pinctrl named states. However, I think we can
    make the pinctrl numbering match rather than the pinctrl naming instead.
    The only issue is the "idle" state; if we allow it to exist anywhere in
    the pinctrl-names list, it'll make the pinctrl numbering mismatch the
    sub-node numbering. I think we can solve this by forcing the idle state
    to be listed last in pinctrl-names (if it's listed at all). I'll update
    my patches based on that David's patch.

     \ /
      Last update: 2012-04-23 18:15    [W:0.024 / U:1.608 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site