Re: [RFC 9/9] dts: tegra: WIP: hack dts to test new dt flags for i2c

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

 



> >>@Rob: If we introduce flag bits in the MSBs of an I2C address, the reg
> >>property is different from the node name. Is this a problem?
> >
> >No, I don't it is a problem.
> 
> The rule so far has been that the unit address (the value in the node name)
> must match the first value in the reg property. I don't see why this rule
> should change. To solve this, just name the node eeprom@c0000042 (or
> eeprom@40000042 with the correction pointed out earlier in the thread).

We can do that; that would mean that people need to find out the values
of the #define which will be used in the reg property. It works, but
will be cumbersome IMO.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux