Hello Wolfram,

Many thanks for your explanation. Olof knows the PASEMI platform very 
well. Maybe he could explain more. Adrian has also a good knowledge 
about the Nemo board.

Cheers,

Christian

On 01 August 2016 at 09:32 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 09:36:00AM +0200, Christian Zigotzky wrote:

quoted

Here you are:

i2c-0    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x90             I2C adapter
i2c-1    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x91             I2C adapter
i2c-2    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x92             I2C adapter
i2c-3    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x93             I2C adapter
i2c-4    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x94             I2C adapter
i2c-5    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x95             I2C adapter
i2c-6    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x96             I2C adapter
i2c-7    i2c           Radeon i2c bit bus 0x97             I2C adapter
i2c-8    i2c           card0-DP-1                          I2C adapter
i2c-9    i2c           card0-DP-2                          I2C adapter

Thanks. So, that means you don't have any bus from i2c-pasemi, since all
numbered busses it wants to have [0-2] are already taken by the Radeon
card. This has always been the case, no change in behaviour since 2008.
Only since last merge window, the I2C core just reports this conflict.
Maybe a bit too noisy?

I don't think using i2c_add_numbered_adapter is a good idea together
with PCI cards. I'd prefer to see i2c_add_adapter used. However, I don't
know the platform at all and if there is someone relying on a static
numbering scheme? I would assume this is not the case, because nobody
really noticed that the busses do not probe for a while. Anyone here
with more insight about PASEMI platform?