On 2016-01-04 16:19, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 01/04/2016 04:10 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> From: Peter Rosin <p...@axentia.se>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <p...@axentia.se>
> 
> It would be quite good if the commit messaged said why it is now safe to
> remove the workaround.

Right, hmm, the two last patches seemed obvious at the time I wrote them,
but now I see a problem.

E.g. if two pca954x devices that depends on being idle when client devices
are not accessed happen to sit on the same bus (perhaps because the muxes
are used to hide a bunch of identical devices), it is indeed not safe to
make this change.

Thanks for making my think, and consider 9/10 and 10/10 dropped.

Cheers,
Peter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to