On 2016-01-04 16:19, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:

On 01/04/2016 04:10 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:

quoted

From: Peter Rosin <redacted>

Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <redacted>

It would be quite good if the commit messaged said why it is now safe to
remove the workaround.

Right, hmm, the two last patches seemed obvious at the time I wrote them,
but now I see a problem.

E.g. if two pca954x devices that depends on being idle when client devices
are not accessed happen to sit on the same bus (perhaps because the muxes
are used to hide a bunch of identical devices), it is indeed not safe to
make this change.

Thanks for making my think, and consider 9/10 and 10/10 dropped.

Cheers,
Peter