On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 05:05:37PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > So in the mean time are you happy with this "dummy" approach? > > No. "dummy" is reserved for a dummy device in case an i2c slave needs > > more than one address. The proper solution would be if > > i2c_sysfs_new_device() could recognize the of_device_ids. > Okay, thanks for clarifying. Or for now to use something like stw481x (even if it's never expected to actually make a difference).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
