On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Jean Delvare wrote: > > I don't see the point in ever defining dev->id as -1. > > The point is spelled out just above: > > "The reason to do so is to avoid sysfs names that only make sense when > there are multiple adapters." > > I.e., some people prefer to have their platform device named just foo > instead of foo.0. Me, I wouldn't have bothered making an exception for > this, but the fact is that the platform core code supports it.
OK, now I get it. I didn't even consider that the platform core handled this as a special case, too. Each in-tree user of the driver already sets dev->id = 0, even if there is only one device, so adding the extra check wouldn't make much difference now. _______________________________________________ i2c mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
