On 08:29 Fri 02 Nov , Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD > wrote: > > so we can show the this of i2c busses > > set the bus device as parent of all devices. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c | 20 ++++++++++---------- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 30 +++++++++++++++--------------- > > drivers/i2c/i2c.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- > > include/i2c/i2c.h | 2 +- > > 4 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > > > int i2c_add_numbered_adapter(struct i2c_adapter *adapter) > > { > > - if (i2c_get_adapter(adapter->nr)) > > - return -EBUSY; > > If you remove this and instead depend on register_device bailing out > later then you should change the error value register_device returns > to -EBUSY. Currently it returns -EINVAL, -EBUSY seems much better here. > > > > + int ret; > > + > > + adapter->dev.id = adapter->nr; > > + strcpy(adapter->dev.name, "i2c"); > > + > > + if (adapter->dev.parent) > > + dev_add_child(adapter->dev.parent, &adapter->dev); > > We should push the dev_add_child to the driver core. Doing this here > means that... > > > + > > + ret = register_device(&adapter->dev); > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > ... the parents child list will be corrupted when register_device fails. > At least w1 and mdiobus have the same problem. But ok, we can fix that > later.
ok I'll take a look after the whole sam9x5 stuff will merged Best Regards, J. _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
