Hi Wolfram,
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
> > Our devices and our platforms have some other requirements which
> > turned me away from using i2c_register_board_info.
>
> Okay, so I'll drop these patches.
Sorry if I was unclear, but I am not able to use
i2c_register_boa
> Our devices and our platforms have some other requirements which
> turned me away from using i2c_register_board_info.
Okay, so I'll drop these patches.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 16:12:14 -0800, Benson Leung wrote:
> Our devices and our platforms have some other requirements which
> turned me away from using i2c_register_board_info.
>
> i2c_register_board_info looks to create predeclarations for a specific
> i2c bus... However, right now, the chromeos_la
Hi Wolfram,
Thank you for the advice. Sorry for the delay in my response.
(sorry for the duplicated message. I neglected to set plain text in my
email editor).
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > I am not sure I get the problem. If you use i2c_register_board_info() to
> > reg
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 02:09:59PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 06:14:18PM -0800, Benson Leung wrote:
> > Hi Wolfram,
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > >> In the chromeos_laptop driver, I do by-name matching of i2c busses to
> > >> find buss
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 06:14:18PM -0800, Benson Leung wrote:
> Hi Wolfram,
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >> In the chromeos_laptop driver, I do by-name matching of i2c busses to
> >> find busses and instantiate devices, so there is value to have each
> >> named some
Hi Wolfram,
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> In the chromeos_laptop driver, I do by-name matching of i2c busses to
>> find busses and instantiate devices, so there is value to have each
>> named something predictable.
>
> Any why don't you use fixed bus numbers which you c
> In the chromeos_laptop driver, I do by-name matching of i2c busses to
> find busses and instantiate devices, so there is value to have each
> named something predictable.
Any why don't you use fixed bus numbers which you can attach the devices
to?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 07:20:33AM -0700, Benson Leung wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Mika Westerberg
> wrote:
> > Is there any real value in having names like "i2c-designware-pci-0"
> > available? I would just drop the whole naming dance instead...
>
> I'd like some way of distinguis
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Mika Westerberg
wrote:
> Is there any real value in having names like "i2c-designware-pci-0"
> available? I would just drop the whole naming dance instead...
I'd like some way of distinguishing between the two busses by name. It
seems sensible to name them 0 and
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 08:26:50PM -0700, Benson Leung wrote:
> Rather than having the bus names be "i2c-designware-pci--1" because
> we have set the .bus_num to -1 to force dynamic allocation, lets have
> the busses named "i2c-designware-pci-0" and "i2c-designware-pci-1"
> to correspond to the cor
Rather than having the bus names be "i2c-designware-pci--1" because
we have set the .bus_num to -1 to force dynamic allocation, lets have
the busses named "i2c-designware-pci-0" and "i2c-designware-pci-1"
to correspond to the correct names of these busses.
The adapter number will still be dynamica
12 matches
Mail list logo
