On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 04:11:01PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:35:59 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > This driver handles the variants pca9534-pca9539, so it chose the name
> > "pca953x". However, there is a led driver which decided on the same
> > name. As a result, those two can't be loaded at the same time. Add a
> > subsystem prefix to make the driver name unique. Device matching will
> > not suffer, because both are I2C drivers which match using a
> > i2c_device_id-table which is not altered.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpio/pca953x.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c b/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
> > index 0451d7a..b30dd0b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/pca953x.c
> > @@ -742,7 +742,7 @@ static int pca953x_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> >
> > static struct i2c_driver pca953x_driver = {
> > .driver = {
> > - .name = "pca953x",
> > + .name = "gpio-pca953x",
> > },
> > .probe = pca953x_probe,
> > .remove = pca953x_remove,
>
> With the proposed change to the leds-pca9532 driver, you could leave
> this one alone, for the sake of simplicity and consistency with the
> pca953x, pcf857x and max732x gpio drivers.
>
> But I am not objecting to this change, if you like it.
I am fine with your suggestion.
Thanks!
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
