On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 12:24:39 -0400, Sean MacLennan wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:17:25 +0200
> "Jean Delvare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ah, OK. If you use i2c_new_device() then it's alright.
>
> Correct.
>
> I have done the same thing for the i2c-ibm_iic.c driver. Jean, I think
> you will like this. It gets rid of the index and the numbered drivers.
> And the walking of the device tree is very clean because the dts knows
> all the devices.
>
> For example here is the relevant portion of the dts for the Warp:
>
> IIC0: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> compatible = "ibm,iic-440ep", "ibm,iic-440gp", "ibm,iic";
> reg = <ef600700 14>;
> interrupt-parent = <&UIC0>;
> interrupts = <2 4>;
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> compatible = "adi,ad7414";
> reg = <4a>;
> interrupts = <19 8>;
> interrupt-parent = <&UIC0>;
> };
> };
>
> It clearly shows that first i2c controller (IIC0) contains one ad7414 device
> at address 4A.
That's fine with me. I expected the dts to be converted to platform
initialization data (i2c_board_info structures) being registered with
i2c_register_board_info() and numbered adapters. But if you prefer
unnumbered adapters and the platform code or the bus driver itself
calls i2c_new_device() based on the dts, that should work too.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
