On 2017-05-22 19:20, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote: >> On 2017-05-22 19:12, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote: >>>> Avoids reimplementation of DMI matching in intel_quark_i2c_setup. >>> >>> What's wrong with current approach? I suppose this will make sense >>> when we will have an issue / impediment. Right now it looks like >>> over-engineering. >>> >>> (Yes, I know what I said to you about this earlier, OTOH see above) >>> >> >> It allows matching on additional DMI tags without additional code - >> patch 2 depends on it. > > And since there is no difference to the frequency the name is enough. > So, I wouldn't go with this series as is. See above.
Nope: Just like for the stmmac, we need to include the asset tags to avoid matching variations of the devices which may carry the same board name. While I will try to avoid that this happens, we are better safe than sorry here. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
