On 10:59 Mon 15 Oct , Bo Shen wrote: > Hi Jean Delvare, > > On 10/10/2012 10:54, Bo Shen wrote: > > > >Hi Jean Delvare, > > > >On 9/19/2012 23:54, Jean Delvare wrote: > >>On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:28:04 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > >>>On 09/18/2012 07:15 PM, Bo Shen wrote: > >>>>I add the debug info, and it give the following error without this > >>>>patch. > >>>> > >>>>--<8---------------------------------- > >>>>adap->name = i2c-gpio-1 > >>>>i2c-gpio i2c.2: using pins 30 (SDA) and 31 (SCL) > >>>>adap->name = i2c-gpio-1 > >>>>i2c-gpio: probe of i2c.3 failed with error -16 > >>>>-->8---------------------------------- > >>>> > >>>>With this patch, it successfully registered. > >>>>--<8---------------------------------- > >>>>adap->name = i2c-gpio0 > >>>>i2c-gpio i2c.2: using pins 30 (SDA) and 31 (SCL) > >>>>adap->name = i2c-gpio1 > >>>>i2c-gpio i2c.3: using pins 90 (SDA) and 91 (SCL) > >>>>-->8---------------------------------- > >>> > >>>Yes, that explains why the registration fails, but not why this patch is > >>>the correct solution to the problem. > >>> > >>>The problematic code appears to be: > >>> > >>>snprintf(adap->name, sizeof(adap->name), "i2c-gpio%d", pdev->id); > >>> > >>>Instead, I think that should be something more like: > >>> > >>>adap->name = dev_name(&pdev->dev); > >> > >>strlcpy(adap->name, dev_name(&pdev->dev), sizeof(adap->name)) > >> if anything, as adap->name is a buffer, not a pointer. > > > >I am sorry for late. I have tested with DT, it works. > > > >Please send this patch to fix the issue. > >Thanks. > > Ping? > > Will you send this patch? Or, I send this patch and add your S.O.B, > which do you prefer? do it Best Regards, J. -- 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
