On Wed, 4 Jul 2018, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Nikolaus Voss
<nikolaus.voss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Nikolaus Voss
<nikolaus.voss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[snip]
But this discussion isn't really related to your patch. I think is
correct but just said that (b) wasn't a justification to leave the I2C
table, points (a) and (c) are though. I won't really be convinced that
the fallback is the correct thing to do or even a good idea.
I didn't want to annoy you, I just wanted to understand why you think
fallback is such a bad thing that you call it a bug. And I see, it has its
drawbacks ;-). Anyway, thanks for taking the time to clarify this,
Oh, I'm not annoyed, sorry if I sounded that way. What I tried to say
is that I've a strong opinion on this and won't be convinced otherwise
:)
So for me is a bug because that would mean that either an entry is
missing in an OF device table or a DTS has a node with a compatible
string without a vendor prefix.
Yes, I see your point (and your strong opinion :-)), but AFAIK vendor
prefix is not mandatory... At least for vendor-agnostic drivers like
"regulator-fixed" (very popular in dts files). My point is not bloating
drivers with large redundant (from a driver-functional view) tables when
one table could be enough for a properly working driver. Having three
different names for exactly the same isn't very beautiful IMO.
I hope you're still not annoyed...
Niko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
