Hi Rob, Am Mittwoch, den 29.03.2017, 08:56 -0500 schrieb Rob Herring: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Thierry Reding > <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 06:36:30PM +0100, Lucas Stach wrote: > >> The i2c adapter on DP AUX is purely a software construct. Linking > >> it to the device node of the parent device is wrong, as it leads to > >> 2 devices sharing the same device node, which is bad practice, as > > > > Who says that two devices can't share the same device node? It's done > > all the time. > > It's done *some of the time* and I would not consider it best practice. > > >> well as the i2c trying to populate children of the i2c adapter by > >> looking at the child device nodes of the parent device. > > > > A set of patches landed in v4.9 to work around this issue in a better > > way. See: > > > > 98b00488459e dt-bindings: i2c: Add support for 'i2c-bus' subnode > > 7e4c224abfe8 i2c: core: Add support for 'i2c-bus' subnode > > What does this buy us? I don't see why this needs to be in DT either. > Contrary to popular belief, DT is not the only way to instantiate > devices, C code can still do it. > > Also, if this one line removal has no side effects, then how was it > even needed? We can always add it back if there's some argument for > why it is needed. Okay, so I take this as you mostly agreeing with the rationale of this patch. @Daniel or someone with drm-misc commit rights: could you please pull this in if you are fine with it? Regards, Lucas _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
