On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 12:24:39 -0400, Sean MacLennan wrote: > On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:17:25 +0200 > "Jean Delvare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Ah, OK. If you use i2c_new_device() then it's alright. > > Correct. > > I have done the same thing for the i2c-ibm_iic.c driver. Jean, I think > you will like this. It gets rid of the index and the numbered drivers. > And the walking of the device tree is very clean because the dts knows > all the devices. > > For example here is the relevant portion of the dts for the Warp: > > IIC0: [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > compatible = "ibm,iic-440ep", "ibm,iic-440gp", "ibm,iic"; > reg = <ef600700 14>; > interrupt-parent = <&UIC0>; > interrupts = <2 4>; > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <0>; > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > compatible = "adi,ad7414"; > reg = <4a>; > interrupts = <19 8>; > interrupt-parent = <&UIC0>; > }; > }; > > It clearly shows that first i2c controller (IIC0) contains one ad7414 device > at address 4A.
That's fine with me. I expected the dts to be converted to platform initialization data (i2c_board_info structures) being registered with i2c_register_board_info() and numbered adapters. But if you prefer unnumbered adapters and the platform code or the bus driver itself calls i2c_new_device() based on the dts, that should work too. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev