Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:01:07 +0100 > Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > >> Hello Jonathan, >> >> On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >> > >> >

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:01:07 +0100 > Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > >> Hello Jonathan, >> >> On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >> > >> > I may well be missing some subtle detail of course

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:01:07 +0100 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello Jonathan, > > On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > I may well be missing some subtle detail of course having spent only a few > > minute

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:01:07 +0100 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello Jonathan, > > On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > I may well be missing some subtle detail of course having spent only a few > > minute looking at this! > > > > Your

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

Hello Dmitry, On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:51 AM, Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > Hello Johnatan, > May be the issue is the same as Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > "What is not correct is to require OF-only drivers to have an I2C > device ID table just as a workaround to have their

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

Hello Dmitry, On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 4:51 AM, Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > Hello Johnatan, > May be the issue is the same as Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > "What is not correct is to require OF-only drivers to have an I2C > device ID table just as a workaround to have their modules >

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

Hello Jonathan, On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: [snip] > > I may well be missing some subtle detail of course having spent only a few > minute looking at this! > Your understanding is correct. This change has nothing to do with module autoloading.

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

Hello Jonathan, On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: [snip] > > I may well be missing some subtle detail of course having spent only a few > minute looking at this! > Your understanding is correct. This change has nothing to do with module autoloading. The .probe_new

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

Hello Johnatan, May be the issue is the same as Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: "What is not correct is to require OF-only drivers to have an I2C device ID table just as a workaround to have their modules auto-loading working." Please see:

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

Hello Johnatan, May be the issue is the same as Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: "What is not correct is to require OF-only drivers to have an I2C device ID table just as a workaround to have their modules auto-loading working." Please see:

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > If you wouldn't mind, could you post the snippet of the tree for this > device. I'm still not sure why it isn't probing, but it could be > that the manufacturer isn't specified, but just the part number? > {

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > If you wouldn't mind, could you post the snippet of the tree for this > device. I'm still not sure why it isn't probing, but it could be > that the manufacturer isn't specified, but just the part number? > { pinctrl-names =

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 00:37:44 +0300 Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > Are you using devicetree or some other method to instantiate the device? > > i.e. How does the kernel know it exists? > > > Yes, I'm

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sun, 7 Jan 2018 00:37:44 +0300 Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > Are you using devicetree or some other method to instantiate the device? > > i.e. How does the kernel know it exists? > > > Yes, I'm using device-tree (in a way like in

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Are you using devicetree or some other method to instantiate the device? > i.e. How does the kernel know it exists? > Yes, I'm using device-tree (in a way like in bindings txt). I have also max1137 connected, which is

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Are you using devicetree or some other method to instantiate the device? > i.e. How does the kernel know it exists? > Yes, I'm using device-tree (in a way like in bindings txt). I have also max1137 connected, which is loaded and probed

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 15:41:13 +0300 Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > Not that I can see. They are a straight swap in drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c > > presumably intended to drop the parameter that is

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 15:41:13 +0300 Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > Not that I can see. They are a straight swap in drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c > > presumably intended to drop the parameter that is unused in the devicetree > > and acpi

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Not that I can see. They are a straight swap in drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c > presumably intended to drop the parameter that is unused in the devicetree > and acpi cases. > > This isn't an area I know that much about

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > Not that I can see. They are a straight swap in drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c > presumably intended to drop the parameter that is unused in the devicetree > and acpi cases. > > This isn't an area I know that much about so I've just played

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:43:38 +0300 Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 17:30:39 +0200 > > Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko > >> > I was not aware of this tag, that's what I wanted

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:43:38 +0300 Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 17:30:39 +0200 > > Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko > >> > I was not aware of this tag, that's what I wanted to write, thanks! > > On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 8:54 PM, Jonathan Cameron

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

> On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 17:30:39 +0200 > Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko >> I was not aware of this tag, that's what I wanted to write, thanks! On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 8:54 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

> On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 17:30:39 +0200 > Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko >> I was not aware of this tag, that's what I wanted to write, thanks! On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 8:54 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > I'm a little confused. Why does this now make module autoloading >

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 17:30:39 +0200 Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > > The simplest fix is to move to ->probe_new() since the driver is not > > used out of DT/ACPI enumeration. > > > >

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 17:30:39 +0200 Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > > The simplest fix is to move to ->probe_new() since the driver is not > > used out of DT/ACPI enumeration. > > > > Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko > > I suppose, and > >

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > The simplest fix is to move to ->probe_new() since the driver is not > used out of DT/ACPI enumeration. > Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko I suppose, and Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Dmitry Mastykin wrote: > The simplest fix is to move to ->probe_new() since the driver is not > used out of DT/ACPI enumeration. > Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko I suppose, and Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko Thanks! > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Mastykin > --- >

[PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

The simplest fix is to move to ->probe_new() since the driver is not used out of DT/ACPI enumeration. Signed-off-by: Dmitry Mastykin --- drivers/iio/adc/max9611.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/max9611.c

[PATCH v2] iio: adc: max9611: fix module auto-loading

The simplest fix is to move to ->probe_new() since the driver is not used out of DT/ACPI enumeration. Signed-off-by: Dmitry Mastykin --- drivers/iio/adc/max9611.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/max9611.c b/drivers/iio/adc/max9611.c index