Hello Wolfram,
Many thanks for your explanation. Olof knows the PASEMI platform very
well. Maybe he could explain more. Adrian has also a good knowledge
about the Nemo board.
Cheers,
Christian
On 01 August 2016 at 09:32 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 09:36:00AM +0200, Christian Zigotzky wrote:
Here you are:
i2c-0 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x90 I2C adapter
i2c-1 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x91 I2C adapter
i2c-2 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x92 I2C adapter
i2c-3 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x93 I2C adapter
i2c-4 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x94 I2C adapter
i2c-5 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x95 I2C adapter
i2c-6 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x96 I2C adapter
i2c-7 i2c Radeon i2c bit bus 0x97 I2C adapter
i2c-8 i2c card0-DP-1 I2C adapter
i2c-9 i2c card0-DP-2 I2C adapter
Thanks. So, that means you don't have any bus from i2c-pasemi, since all
numbered busses it wants to have [0-2] are already taken by the Radeon
card. This has always been the case, no change in behaviour since 2008.
Only since last merge window, the I2C core just reports this conflict.
Maybe a bit too noisy?
I don't think using i2c_add_numbered_adapter is a good idea together
with PCI cards. I'd prefer to see i2c_add_adapter used. However, I don't
know the platform at all and if there is someone relying on a static
numbering scheme? I would assume this is not the case, because nobody
really noticed that the busses do not probe for a while. Anyone here
with more insight about PASEMI platform?
--
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
