Hi Vladimir,

On 2016-03-24 15:24, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:

On 24.03.2016 13:05, Peter Rosin wrote:

quoted

On 2016-03-24 10:50, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:

quoted

On 05.01.2016 17:57, Peter Rosin wrote:

quoted

@@ -196,21 +195,21 @@ static int i2c_arbitrator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		dev_err(dev, "Cannot parse i2c-parent\n");
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
-	arb->parent = of_get_i2c_adapter_by_node(parent_np);
+	muxc->parent = of_find_i2c_adapter_by_node(parent_np);

why do you prefer here to use "unlocked" version of API?

Foe example would it be safe/possible to unload an I2C bus device driver
module or unbind I2C device itself in runtime?

I think you ask why I change from of_get_i2c_... to of_find_i2c_..., and that
change was not intentional. It was the result of a bad merge during an early
rebase.

Does that cover it?

Yep, thank you for clarification, please account this in v3.

Oh , v3 is old news, v4 was sent out some weeks ago, and there is a v5
on a github branch. This bad rebase was fixed in v4.

I'll try to find some time to review the whole changeset carefully,
in fact I briefly reviewed it two months ago, but I didn't find
anything obviously wrong that time.

Please put that on hold until I have rebased ontop of v4.6-rc1 and
changed a couple of other things. I'd hate for you to waste your
time on outdated patches.

Cheers,
Peter