Kevin, Thanks for the reply.
>> Do you have any suggestions to handle this in a clean way? > >The extentions to the i2c framework look like the right way to go to >me. I agree this is the right approach. > >I suggest you contribute to the discussions on the above thread by >testing it out and seeing if it works for you followed by a query on >the i2c list to state that we need it on davinci and see what is left >to get it to mainline. > I have posted some queries, but didn't get a response. As I am moving to a different project, there is not much I can do. At this point, I have integrated the MT9T031 sensor in upstream with vpfe capture and would like to push a patch to uptream. My approach is like this:- Separate pc9543 part from rest of the camera capture code that can be used by anyone who wants to use this driver on davinci platforms. Submit the rest of the driver to upstream with proper documentation that indicates the dependency. Once i2c mux support is available, re-work the driver (I guess mostly changing an adapter-id to match with the new bus id). >Only if the i2c core extentions are a dead end would I consider >merging a temporary solution, but even then I'd want to see a clear >path to the right solution. > The right solution is i2c mux support as mentioned earlier. I will be spending 20% of my time next 3 months during which I might be able to work for the right solution. >Kevin > _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
