Hi Olof,

And even if you DO decide to go that route, guess what? You need a
translation table just as with (3) anyway!

True.

quoted

quoted

quoted

3. use a glue layer with a translation map.

In my opinion this is an OK solution since the same information has to
be added somewhere already anyway -- eiither to the drivers or to this
translation table. It should of course be an abstacted shared table,
preferrably contained under the i2c source directories since several
platforms and architectures might share them.

I could think of a mixture between 2. and 3.:

Using the compatible attribute with the manufacturer stripped off as I2c name by default
and using an exception table. For now, the struct i2c_driver_device would currently only
need one entry ("dallas,ds1374", "rtc-ds1374").

You still need the translation table, you're just flattening the
namespace to one string instead of two, the same information still has
to be encoded. I can't see what the benefit of this approach compared to
the other one is. "dallas,ds1374" already only has one translation entry
in the table?

As soon as http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/i2c/2008-January/002752.html has been
applied, one could get rid of all entries where the I2c (alias) name can be obtained from
the OF name just by stripping the manufacturer.

Thanks,
Jochen