Re: [PATCH v2] mfd: tps65217: Introduce dependency on CONFIG_OF

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

 




On Sunday 11 June 2017 10:50 AM, Keerthy wrote:
> 
> 
> On Friday 09 June 2017 05:18 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 1:18 AM, Keerthy <j-keerthy@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -static const struct i2c_device_id tps65217_id_table[] = {
>>>>>> -       {"tps65217", TPS65217},
>>>>>> -       { /* sentinel */ }
>>>>>> -};
>>>>>> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, tps65217_id_table);
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately you can't get rid of this table (yet) since the I2C
>>>> subsystem always reports a MODALIAS of the form "i2c:tps65217" even
>>>> when the devices have been registered via OF. There are only a couple
>>>> of drivers more to clean-up and then I'll post a patch that fixes the
>>>> I2C core to report a proper OF modalias. But for now, removing will
>>>> mean that module autoload will be broken for this driver.
>>>
>>> So this means whole logic of probe_new without i2c_device_id is not
>>> ready? I will have to revert all that logic right?
>>>
>>
>> No, that's not what I meant.
>>
>> It's absolutely correct for drivers that can't be build as a module
>> (i.e: have a boolean instead of tristate Kconfig symbol) or if you
>> want to get rid of the struct i2c_device_id pointed passed to your
>> probe callback since isn't used in the driver.
>>
>> But it's not enough to get rid of the struct i2c_device_id table for
>> the reason I mentioned before.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying!
> 
>>
>>> Lee Jones,
>>>
>>> Does that mean even for LP87565 driver we need MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE for
>>> module autoload?
>>>
>>
>> I guess you are talking about [0], right?
>>
>> Yes, it's needed because the driver can be built as a module.
> 
> Okay.

Javier,

I found one instance where in the config is tristate MFD_MAX77686.
The driver already seems to be using probe_new.

mfd: max77686: Use the struct i2c_driver .probe_new instead of .probe

So for the above module auto probe would be broken?

- Keerthy
> 
>>
>> [0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/5/19/394
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Javier
>>
> --
> 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
> 
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux