Stefan Roese wrote: > On Thursday 26 June 2008, Timur Tabi wrote: >>> The only thing a platform should ever use aliases for is if it needs >>> to (for whatever purpose) find a specific device, that it cannot >>> identify otherwise (via "reg", ...). And then that platform code >>> should look up the device by the alias, not look up the alias by the >>> device -- there is no 1-1 mapping from device to alias! >> Hmmm, I hadn't through about that. I guess this patch isn't such a great >> idea after all. I rescind it. > > Too bad. So now we're back to where we started with the discussion > about "cell-index" vs. "index" vs. no index on I2C device nodes. :-(
Well, there's a lot of disagreement on this subject. Not only do we not agree on a method of enumerating devices, a lot of people have a problem with the concept of enumerating them in the first place! This whole thing started with a problem I had in ASoC V2: identifying an I2C device by name and number. Scott W. pointed out that all I need in my "fabric driver" is a pointer to the i2c_adapter structure that the I2C driver was using. If we create a link from the I2C device node to its matching i2c_adapter structure, then I won't care what the adapter/bus number is. Unfortunately, it appears the current I2C code in fsl_soc.c can't handle that, but of_i2c.c can. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
