On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Wolfram Sang [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Right, I read the function which provides the functionality, but my
point is; I don't think my patch changes the semantics in a way which
would adversely affect this option.  If you think that it does, can you
specify how please?

Currently, if a driver would be DT only and does not provide a seperate
i2c_device_id table, then the driver is unusable with method 4. I don't
like to have some drivers being capable of it and some not.

quoted

Does the sysfs method create a i2c_device_id table?  If not, how does
it probe successfully pre-patch?

The sysfs method creates a device. Its name is matched against
i2c_device_ids only since it does not have a node pointer for DT to be
matched against.

Is this really so useful on embedded systems?

I was under the impression that this method was something used
on say PC desktops with temperature monitors and EEPROMs
on some I2C link on the PCB, usage entirely optional and fun
for userspace hacks.

And when we say "people use it" do we mean "sensors-detect
uses it, on desktops", really?

Yours,
Linus Walleij