On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 10:29:53PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Fri 2015-04-03 14:23:56, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > Hi Pavel, > > > > On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 10:23:44AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > > Hi Pawel, > > > > > > I'm still Pavel. v, not w. > > > > I know too many Pawels. Sorry about that. :-) > > > > > > I guess it uses adp1653_id_table. I'd hade to add redundand > > > information, because if it would just mask the errors if the code > > > changed... > > > > Indeed, that's true. This is comparing "adp1653" vs. comparing > > "adi,adp1653". I think I still prefer the latter since it's got also the > > vendor prefix included. > > > > Suppose we change this later and someone misspelled the vendor prefix --- > > their board would break. > > Suppose we do what you suggest. That does not fix the problem, since > code will still match the "adp1653" in case someone misspells it. > > If you want to change how i2c device matching works, well, you can do > it, but my patch is not right place to do that. Good point. Let's leave it as-is. -- Sakari Ailus e-mail: sakari.ailus@xxxxxx XMPP: sailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
