Re: [PATCH] hwmon: Remove I2C_CLASS_HWMON from drivers w/o detect() and address_list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 27.01.2024 17:01, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 1/27/24 07:02, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> Class-based I2C probing requires detect() and address_list to be
>> set in the I2C client driver, see checks in i2c_detect().
>> It's misleading to declare I2C_CLASS_HWMON support if this
>> precondition isn't met.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>   drivers/hwmon/adm1177.c       | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/ds1621.c        | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/ds620.c         | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/ina209.c        | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/ina238.c        | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/max127.c        | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/max31760.c      | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/max31790.c      | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/max31827.c      | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/max6621.c       | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/max6697.c       | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/occ/p8_i2c.c    | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/pmbus/ir36021.c | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/powr1220.c      | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/sbrmi.c         | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/sbtsi_temp.c    | 1 -
>>   drivers/hwmon/w83773g.c       | 1 -
> 
> Follow-up question: You did not drop the class from drivers/hwmon/adt7410.c
> and drivers/hwmon/emc2305.c. Is that because of the address_list in those
> drivers ?
> 
Yes. If address_list is set, this shows a certain intention to support
I2C class-based probing. Then the question is whether adding the missing
detect() implementation may be the more appropriate action.

> As far as I can see, both address_list and I2C_CLASS_HWMON are useless
> in those drivers and could be dropped as well. Am I missing something ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Guenter
> 
Heiner





[Index of Archives]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [ALSA Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux