On 11/02, Akinobu Mita wrote: > 2016-11-02 2:48 GMT+09:00 Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On 11/01, Akinobu Mita wrote: > >> 2016-11-01 3:15 GMT+09:00 Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >> > On 10/31, Akinobu Mita wrote: > >> > >> I think it isn't needed. Because the data field in struct of_device_id > >> for this driver is not used even if the device is registered from > >> device tree. But the driver_data in i2c_device_id is used instead. > > > > Ok. Have you tested this driver with DT or platform data? Do you > > prefix the compatible string with "ti," in the DT case? > > I have tested with DT with compatible = "ti,cdce937" and checked that > correct i2c_device_id is passed by the caller of cdce925_probe(). > > According to of_i2c_register_device() in drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c, > the manufacturer prefix like "ti," is stripped from i2c_client->name by > of_modalias_node(). So i2c_match_id() can find correct i2c_device_id > entry and ->probe() is called with it. Great! Thanks for the explanation. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
