On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 02:09:09PM +0100, Alexander Sverdlin wrote: > Hi Wolfram! > > On 15/01/15 13:32, ext Wolfram Sang wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 06:00:10PM +0100, Alexander Sverdlin wrote: > >> of: i2c: Add idle-disconnect DT property to PCA954x mux driver > >> > >> Add idle-disconnect device tree property to PCA954x mux driver. The new property > >> forces the multiplexer to disconnect child buses in idle state. This is used, for > >> example, when there are several multiplexers on the same bus and the devices on > >> the underlying buses might have same I2C addresses. > > > > Basically OK. Question to DT maintainers: "idle-disconnect", > > "i2c-mux-idle-disconnect", or is there another existing binding we could > > use? > > > >> At the same time old (and not used in the tree) platform data binding > >> deselect_on_exit is removed to simplify the implementation. Old binding has > >> different (per-channel) semantics and doesn't fit well in the new concept. > > > > I'd prefer to keep it. It should be only one || more. It is not really > > in the way IMO. > > It complicates the implementation 3x times :) This is part of our discussion with Laurent: Does it? I don't want DT and platform_data to behave equally. I just want to keep being backwards compatible. So, I'd suggest: (pdata && pdata->modes[num].deselect_on_exit) || idle_disconnect ? pca954x_deselect_mux : NULL); > > I'm not keen to brake out-of-tree code (if any), but may be it will be > > decided to drop this per-channel deselect_on_exit, because it's not used at > > least in the kernel tree... I couldn't find a user of the platform_data, at all. But removing platform_data support is a seperate patch, and deprecating platform_data is a seperate and general issue IMO.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
