Peter Korsgaard said the following: >>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Lawnick <ml.lawnick@xxxxxx> writes: > > >> But this patch is independent from that work as the mux access isn't > >> through I2C, hence no changes to i2c-core needed. > > Michael> i2c-mux patch does not expect path control via i2c. > Michael> Your scenario fits perfectly. > > Hmm, I'll take a closer look at the last version then - sorry. In the > past it afaik did. What is the point of the i2c-core changes if path > control isn't via i2c? > The changes in i2c-core are mostly for traversing the tree and check for duplicate addresses. >From i2c-core and user space view there is no logical difference between a h/w adapter and a multiplexer. They are all handled the same. But I fear your question arises from your different approach. May be it gets more clear after looking into i2c-mux.c and pca954x.c. -- KR Michael Lawnick -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
