On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:11:30AM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi David, > > On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 13:55:07 -0700, David Brownell wrote: > > > Why don't you simply initialize the drivers in question with > > > subsys_initcall()? That's what i2c-pnx, i2c-omap, i2c-davinci and > > > tps65010 are doing at the moment. > > > > If they happen to sit outside the I2C tree and *before* it in > > link order, things will misbehave. > > Well, i2c system bus drivers shouldn't sit outside of the I2C tree, so > that's not a problem. If you start accepting that drivers live at > random places in the source tree, then there's simply no way to get > things right.
That's simply not a realistic view. As I've already pointed out, framebuffer devices have I2C busses for reading the DDC information from monitors. These I2C bus drivers live in drivers/video. Video grabbers have I2C busses for controlling, eg, tuners and video decoders. These live in drivers/media. If I follow your argument, would you like cyber2000fb.c to be moved entirely from drivers/video into drivers/i2c/busses because it contains an i2c bus driver? Clearly not. _______________________________________________ i2c mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
