Jochen Friedrich wrote: > Hi Timur, > >> In situations where it doesn't matter which I2C bus is #1 and which one is >> #2, >> then I think the code should just initialize idx based on the order the nodes >> are found in the tree. >> >> In situations where it does matter, then we should use cell-index. > > that's what I did in i2c-cpm, as well. However, here I use the property > "linux,i2c-index" instead (see > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=18603).
Well, I just don't see the point of having two different properties that say the same thing. I'm not an IEE 1275 purist, so I don't think we should be hampered by old node definitions. I especially don't like having a property specifically for indexing I2C nodes that can't be used to enumerate other nodes. The DMA and SSI controllers on Freescale parts use cell-index to enumerate them. It just seems dumb to invent a new property. Will there ever be a situation where a node will contain "cell-index" and "linux,i2c-index"? -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
