Thread (12 messages) 12 messages, 4 authors, 2012-10-06

Re: [PATCH 12/19] i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via Device Tree

From: Lee Jones <hidden>
Date: 2012-09-14 08:22:24
Also in: linux-arm-kernel, lkml

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:42:36AM -0700, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
be registered directly from Device Tree instead, removing the
requirement for the aforementioned calls from platform code.

CC: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
CC: Wolfram Sang <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <redacted>
The patch as such is fine.
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <redacted>

...but there will be merge issues (of the type I'm
discussing with Arnd in another thread).
quoted
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c |    4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
index 5d1a970..01231c2 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
 #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
 #include <linux/platform_data/i2c-nomadik.h>
 #include <linux/of.h>
+#include <linux/of_i2c.h>
This is clearly dependent on the other patches to I2C to
be merged first (the include above is not yet there in
linux-next even), so this patch should go into Wolfram's
tree right? Else we have to rip out all the patches to the
I2C driver from his tree and funnel it all through ARM SoC.

With the changes to the device tree itself being dependent
on this, they should thus also go through the I2C tree.

But they may be heavily dependent on the other DT
changes you've done, so they cannot be applied to
Wolfram's tree...

And thus you may need to hold this change off
until the I2C changes are upstream, or start creating
cross-tree dependencies.

Maybe I shouldn't worry about these things and just
ACK stuff, but I have such problems with cross-tree
merges myself so just trying to be helpful :-/
If I send all my stuff though arm-soc, then I have no
dependencies at all. All my patches are based on the latest
-rc. It seems a little silly to split them all up and push
them through lots of different trees. That way we're bound
to increase the chances of merge conflicts surely?

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help