Hi all, I was looking at the i2c core code and I stumbled in a condition that looks like some "legacy" thing. While I'm not sure about this, this mailing list feels like a good place to get some feedback. The condition in question is this https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c#L356 So, my first question is: Can we actually get into `i2c_device_probe()` without `i2c_device_match()` being called first? If not, it looks that this condition could just be removed... If we can get there without `i2c_device_match()`, I can see a problem in the condition if we just use of_id_table in ACPI. `i2c_acpi_match_device()` just calls `acpi_match_device()` whereas I think `acpi_driver_match_device()` should be used if we want to take of_id_table into account. Does this really look like an issue or Am I missing something? - Nuno Sá _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
