> So, maybe the easier thing to do is change i2c_lock_adapter to only
> lock the segment, and then have the callers beneath drivers/i2c/
> (plus the above mlx90614 driver) that really want to lock the root
> adapter instead of the segment adapter call a new function named
> i2c_lock_root (or something like that). Admittedly, that will be
> a few more trivial changes, but all but one will be under the I2C
> umbrella and thus require less interaction.
> 
> Wolfram, what do you think?

It sounds tempting, yet I am concerned about regressions. From that
point of view, it is safer to introduce i2c_lock_segment() and convert the
users which would benefit from that. How many drivers would be affected?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to