Hi Mark: (cc'ed Brian also) * Mark D. Studebaker <mds4 at verizon.net> [2004-12-09 11:01:36 -0500]: > What Brian discovered is that an i2c bus mux implementation requires a > nolock version > of some functions. Think about how the bootstrap works: > Bus gets added > Mux chip found > Sub busses get added (but can't because lock still held - hang) > So that's what the (first half of) i2c-core patch does. Get rid of the > leading '__', rename to xxx_nolock, > and export them so that the virtual driver can implement the bootstrap. > > It's not a big change. Maybe there's a way to avoid it, though... I don't > know. Well... why can't you do the sub-bus creation in pca954x_attach_adapter() (after the call to i2c_detect) ? This gets rid of all the locking problems, and IMHO makes more sense w.r.t. the respective function names anyway. Regards, -- Mark M. Hoffman mhoffman at lightlink.com
