Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello, On 03/16/2017 12:39 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 03/16/2017 12:05 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: [snip] >> >> Next time, maybe do a wiki page and point people to it? That being said, >> we should probably create a wiki page on the I2C wiki anyhow. >> Documenting the current state of

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello, On 03/16/2017 12:39 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 03/16/2017 12:05 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: [snip] >> >> Next time, maybe do a wiki page and point people to it? That being said, >> we should probably create a wiki page on the I2C wiki anyhow. >> Documenting the current state of

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/16/2017 12:05 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >>> Rob into the boat if he is OK with updating all DTS files having such an >>> EEPROM. >>> >> >> Agreed, are you going to take care of that? > > Nope, sorry, no bandwidth. You might ask Lee, he was very interested in > getting

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/16/2017 12:05 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >>> Rob into the boat if he is OK with updating all DTS files having such an >>> EEPROM. >>> >> >> Agreed, are you going to take care of that? > > Nope, sorry, no bandwidth. You might ask Lee, he was very interested in > getting

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> > Rob into the boat if he is OK with updating all DTS files having such an > > EEPROM. > > > > Agreed, are you going to take care of that? Nope, sorry, no bandwidth. You might ask Lee, he was very interested in getting proper I2C OF support upstream. > up on this task, it has been a big time

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> > Rob into the boat if he is OK with updating all DTS files having such an > > EEPROM. > > > > Agreed, are you going to take care of that? Nope, sorry, no bandwidth. You might ask Lee, he was very interested in getting proper I2C OF support upstream. > up on this task, it has been a big time

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/16/2017 10:36 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Sorry, for not explaining myself correctly. I meant to ask who can do what >> you >> suggested before. I'm certainly not familiar with this driver to identify >> what >> is the minimum set of compatible strings that can be used as

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/16/2017 10:36 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Sorry, for not explaining myself correctly. I meant to ask who can do what >> you >> suggested before. I'm certainly not familiar with this driver to identify >> what >> is the minimum set of compatible strings that can be used as

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> Sorry, for not explaining myself correctly. I meant to ask who can do what you > suggested before. I'm certainly not familiar with this driver to identify what > is the minimum set of compatible strings that can be used as generic fallback. Well, I am the maintainer of this driver :) But we

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> Sorry, for not explaining myself correctly. I meant to ask who can do what you > suggested before. I'm certainly not familiar with this driver to identify what > is the minimum set of compatible strings that can be used as generic fallback. Well, I am the maintainer of this driver :) But we

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/16/2017 10:07 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >>> I'd think we should fix the DTS files instead to contain a fallback we >>> agree on. Say, we agree on "atmel,at24c01" as a the generic fallback, >>> the DTS should contain: >>> >>> compatible = ",", "atmel,at24c01" >>> >>> And

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/16/2017 10:07 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >>> I'd think we should fix the DTS files instead to contain a fallback we >>> agree on. Say, we agree on "atmel,at24c01" as a the generic fallback, >>> the DTS should contain: >>> >>> compatible = ",", "atmel,at24c01" >>> >>> And

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> > I'd think we should fix the DTS files instead to contain a fallback we > > agree on. Say, we agree on "atmel,at24c01" as a the generic fallback, > > the DTS should contain: > > > > compatible = ",", "atmel,at24c01" > > > > And we shall only keep compatible values in the source file

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> > I'd think we should fix the DTS files instead to contain a fallback we > > agree on. Say, we agree on "atmel,at24c01" as a the generic fallback, > > the DTS should contain: > > > > compatible = ",", "atmel,at24c01" > > > > And we shall only keep compatible values in the source file

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Andy, On 03/15/2017 07:43 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas > wrote: >> Hello Andy, >> >> On 03/15/2017 08:21 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas >>>

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Andy, On 03/15/2017 07:43 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas > wrote: >> Hello Andy, >> >> On 03/15/2017 08:21 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas >>> wrote: On 03/15/2017 04:58

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello Andy, > > On 03/15/2017 08:21 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas >> wrote: >>> On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello Andy, > > On 03/15/2017 08:21 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas >> wrote: >>> On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: >> >>> Unfortunately some maintainers do and

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Andy, On 03/15/2017 08:21 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas > wrote: >> On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Unfortunately some maintainers do and don't accept patches adding I2C tables >> only to

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Andy, On 03/15/2017 08:21 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas > wrote: >> On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Unfortunately some maintainers do and don't accept patches adding I2C tables >> only to have module autoloading

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Unfortunately some maintainers do and don't accept patches adding I2C tables > only to have module autoloading working so I still think it should be fixed.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Unfortunately some maintainers do and don't accept patches adding I2C tables > only to have module autoloading working so I still think it should be fixed. Wait, how does it work

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> So there isn't an agreement if is better to just rely in the current behavior >> (and have a superfluous I2C device ID table) or fix the I2C core (and need a >> OF device ID table). > > For at24, the i2c_device_id table is not

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Wolfram, On 03/15/2017 04:58 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> So there isn't an agreement if is better to just rely in the current behavior >> (and have a superfluous I2C device ID table) or fix the I2C core (and need a >> OF device ID table). > > For at24, the i2c_device_id table is not

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> So there isn't an agreement if is better to just rely in the current behavior > (and have a superfluous I2C device ID table) or fix the I2C core (and need a > OF device ID table). For at24, the i2c_device_id table is not superfluous! It is used outside the DT world as well. > Indeed, but

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

> So there isn't an agreement if is better to just rely in the current behavior > (and have a superfluous I2C device ID table) or fix the I2C core (and need a > OF device ID table). For at24, the i2c_device_id table is not superfluous! It is used outside the DT world as well. > Indeed, but

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Andy, On 03/14/2017 07:59 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas > wrote: >> The driver doesn't have a struct of_device_id table but supported devices >> are registered via Device Trees. This is working on the

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

Hello Andy, On 03/14/2017 07:59 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas > wrote: >> The driver doesn't have a struct of_device_id table but supported devices >> are registered via Device Trees. This is working on the assumption that a >> I2C device

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > The driver doesn't have a struct of_device_id table but supported devices > are registered via Device Trees. This is working on the assumption that a > I2C device registered via OF will always match a

Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > The driver doesn't have a struct of_device_id table but supported devices > are registered via Device Trees. This is working on the assumption that a > I2C device registered via OF will always match a legacy I2C device ID and >