Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] i2c: core: add function to request an alias

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 02:35:33PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
> > >> I.e. if say the adv748x had in DT defined aliases at 0x08, 0x09,
> > >> 0x0A..., but not yet probed (thus no device is listening at these
> > >> addresses) ... and then a max9286 came along and asked for 'any' spare
> > >> address with this call, would it be given 0x08 first?
> 
> You have a point here. Ancillary addresses are not blocked until the
> driver probes, this is true. I wonder now if we should handle multiple
> addresses in i2c-core-of.c somehow, too? It does block the first <reg>
> entry, but not all.
> 
> > The core 'could' parse all reg entries, and conclude that any extended
> > entries within a device node are aliases as well, which should be
> > reserved, but I don't think it could know if the device is actually
> > going to be enabled by a driver (well, it could look it up).
> 
> We could argue that if it is described in DT, it should be blocked in
> any case, or?

That seems fair to me.

> > But it would also have to traverse any i2c-muxes too!
> 
> I probably need a second thought about muxes as well.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart



[Index of Archives]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Hardward Monitoring]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux