Hello, On Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:40 AM Kukjin Kim wrote: > > I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and > > improve it later for consistency. > > > Yeah, we should decide for this. > > However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style. > > Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board want > to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B, > maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem about > I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose. Could you explain it in more detailed way? I really don't see any problem here. Please distinguish the registration of s3c-i2cX device to platform bus and the fact the structure has been compiled into the kernel. In your case all dev-i2cX entries will be compiled into the kernel, but board A will REGISTER to platform bus only the entries that are in use. No runtime problem can ever happen. That's the main basis of the kernel device framework. > Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more I2C > channels, the probability can be increased. Again, I really don't understand your concerns. > Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done. > How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it? > > I think we have some time that talk about this issue. Best regards -- Marek Szyprowski Samsung Poland R&D Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |