[RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger
Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable through the property probe of the FDT I2C device node: [EMAIL PROTECTED] { ... compatible = fsl-i2c; probe;

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Jean Delvare
Hi Wolfgang, On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:47:25 +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable through the property probe of the FDT I2C device node:

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Jon Smirl
On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable through the property probe of the FDT I2C device node: All this patch seems to be

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger
Jean Delvare wrote: Hi Wolfgang, On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:47:25 +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable through the property probe of the FDT I2C device

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger
Jon Smirl wrote: On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable through the property probe of the FDT I2C device node: All this

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Jon Smirl
On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jon Smirl wrote: On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Grant Likely
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:47:25PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable through the property probe of the FDT I2C device node: [EMAIL

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Grant Likely
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:24:22AM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jon Smirl wrote: On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Jon Smirl
On 7/16/08, Grant Likely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:24:22AM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jon Smirl wrote: On 7/16/08, Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Jochen Friedrich
Hi Grant, On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:47:25PM +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Currently, the I2C buses are probed for HWMON I2C devices, which might not be acceptable in same cases. This patch makes device probing configurable through the property probe of the FDT I2C device node:

Re: [RFC] I2C: fsl-i2c: make device probing configurable via FDT

2008-07-16 Thread Timur Tabi
Jon Smirl wrote: Probing an i2c bus does not necessarily come to a good conclusion. The probes for some chips can alter the states in others. People have accidentally changed voltage settings and fried CPU chips. The process is not well defined. I agree. We should not be implementing any