On 12/11/2012 01:21 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: > [+devicetree-discuss] > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Peter Huewe <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have a short question about the relations between i2c and devicetrees. >> >> I was wondering >> is the device part of the compatible string of a (trivial) i2c device >> instanciated via devicetree _always_ identical to name in i2c_client.name ? >> Or can it be somehow different? > > It can be different, but the driver will then need to add a OF table > that matches the probing. By default the i2c/dt core code will strip > off the vendor prefix (before ",") and try probing with the rest of > the device name. If that doesn't match the client name, that is when > you need the additional table.
While relying on the prefix stripping works, I think I recall Grant mentioning that people shouldn't rely on it - namely that any I2C device that gets instantiated from DT should contain the OF match table explicitly. I CC'd Grant in case I'm mis-quoting him. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
