On 2016-01-04 16:19, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > On 01/04/2016 04:10 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> From: Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxx> > > It would be quite good if the commit messaged said why it is now safe to > remove the workaround. Right, hmm, the two last patches seemed obvious at the time I wrote them, but now I see a problem. E.g. if two pca954x devices that depends on being idle when client devices are not accessed happen to sit on the same bus (perhaps because the muxes are used to hide a bunch of identical devices), it is indeed not safe to make this change. Thanks for making my think, and consider 9/10 and 10/10 dropped. Cheers, Peter -- 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
