Il Monday 25 February 2008 09:02:37 hai scritto: > Hi Frank, > > On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 21:41:54 -0800, Edelhaeuser, Frank wrote: > > The driver I submitted implements the "new style" driver model. These > > driver's don't probe the bus automatically. Instead, devices must be > > instantiated by calling i2c_register_board_info() for each multiplexer > > device. Please note that this driver implements a special syntax for the > > type field: e.g. .type = "pxa9544,5" tells the driver to create 4 > > virtual i2c buses with ids 5, 6, 7 and 8. You would > > i2c_register_board_info() your PXA9544 multiplexer with the root i2c bus > > and your bus segment devices with those virtual i2c buses. > > Please don't abuse the type field, instead define a custom structure > and pass it to the driver as platform data. This will give you much > more flexibility as well.
Hello, thanks for your answers Well, i googled this days to learn something about the i2c_register_board_info() and the platform data structures. This requires a good knowledge of programming as i haven't :( I understood that pca9540 (in my case) definitions have to be hardcoded somewhere (the only thread i found about this regards a SIP device registration on arm platform), but, where? and these needs to be coded as a "C" struct (the "type" field is part of this struct?)? Well, i think i'm not enough skinned to manage this driver, peraph a whish: will be implemented something like a modprobe option to make this driver more user friendly? Please feel free to point me to adequate documentation about the platform data structure, in the meanwhile i continue googling... Roascio paolo _______________________________________________ i2c mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
