On 08.04.2024 09:42, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Another simple solution would be to move the implementation of >> i2c_root_adapter() from i2c mux to i2c core. It just uses >> i2c_parent_is_i2c_adapter() which is an inline function of >> i2c core. What do you think? > > I have no objections putting i2c_root_adapter() into the core. I think, > however, that this patch makes the code a tad more readable. What is the > downside of the symbol (despite we have way too many of those in > general)? > I have no strong preference here, Andi mention that a new config symbol wouldn't be his preferred approach. Therefore I brought up moving the function to i2c core as an alternative. Maybe he can elaborate on the reasoning.
