On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 11:29:24AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 12:23:19PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 11:06:05AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 02:09:57AM -0000, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > > It is not good idea to mix static and dynamic I2C adapter numbering. In > > > > this particular case on Lynxpoint we had graphics I2C adapter which took > > > > the first numbers preventing the designware I2C driver from using the > > > > adapter numbers it preferred. > > > > > > > > Fix this by switching to use dynamic adapter numbering on Intel > > > > Lynxpoint. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerb...@linux.intel.com> > > > > > > I am fearing regressions here if the bus numbering changes. > > > > There are no users for this dynamic numbering yet since it was introduced > > with the Lynxpoint support. > > Please add this to the commit msg.
Sure, thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
