On Fri, 29 Aug 2014, Wolfram Sang wrote:

quoted

Placing this firmly back on your plate.  I truly hope we don't miss
another merge-window.

Nope, we won't. I'll still need a week or so due to other duties.

Perfectly reasonable.

quoted

This patch-set has the support of some pretty
senior kernel maintainers, so I hope acceptance shouldn't be too
difficult.

Cool, then they could ack it like Grant did? That surely helps.

I was talking about Grant (and Linus - I'll poke him seperately). ;)

quoted

As previously discussed I believe it should be okay for an I2C device
driver _not_ supply an I2C ID table to match to.

I agree...

quoted

The I2C subsystem
should be able to match via other means, such as via OF tables.  The
blocking factor during our previous conversation was to keep
registering via sysfs up and running.  This set does that.

... yet it also should not cause regressions. If you fixed that, sounds
great!

quoted

After thinking more deeply about the problem, it occurred to me that
any I2C device driver which uses the sysfs method and issues an
of_match_device() would also fail their probe().  Bolted on to this
set is a new, more generic way for these devices to match against
either of the I2C/OF tables.

Even better :) I am generally positive with your patchset, but need to
review the implementation. For core stuff, this simply needs more
attention.

Agree.

Thanks Wolfram.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog