| Message ID | 1350034971-1050-1-git-send-email-voice.shen@atmel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 17:42:51 +0800, Bo Shen wrote: > The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. > When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned > the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, > and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device > if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. > > In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number > Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). > > Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> > --- > Change since v1 > Make the commit message more clear > --- > arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c > index 0f24cfb..805ef95 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c > @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static struct i2c_gpio_platform_data pdata = { > > static struct platform_device at91sam9260_twi_device = { > .name = "i2c-gpio", > - .id = -1, > + .id = 0, > .dev.platform_data = &pdata, > }; > Acked-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Hi Bo Shen, On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> wrote: > The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. > When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned > the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, > and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device > if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. > > In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number > Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). I have been bitten by this myself on RM9200. > Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> > --- > Change since v1 > Make the commit message more clear > --- > arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- This pattern exist in at91rm9200_devices.c, at91sam9261_devices.c, at91sam9263_devices.c and at91sam9rl_devices.c you might want to fix them as well. I assume we have the same problem if CONFIG_I2C_AT91 is set? See further down in at91sam9260_devices.c we have another: ".id = -1," regards Joachim Eastwood > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c > index 0f24cfb..805ef95 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c > @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static struct i2c_gpio_platform_data pdata = { > > static struct platform_device at91sam9260_twi_device = { > .name = "i2c-gpio", > - .id = -1, > + .id = 0, > .dev.platform_data = &pdata, > }; > > -- > 1.7.9.5 > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Hi Joachim Eastwood, On 10/13/2012 1:42, Joachim Eastwood wrote: > Hi Bo Shen, > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> wrote: >> The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. >> When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned >> the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, >> and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device >> if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. >> >> In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number >> Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). > > I have been bitten by this myself on RM9200. > >> Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> >> --- >> Change since v1 >> Make the commit message more clear >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- > > This pattern exist in at91rm9200_devices.c, at91sam9261_devices.c, > at91sam9263_devices.c and at91sam9rl_devices.c you might want to fix > them as well. Thanks for your information. After I test these boards, I will send patches to fix them, while not in this patch. > > I assume we have the same problem if CONFIG_I2C_AT91 is set? > See further down in at91sam9260_devices.c we have another: ".id = -1," Maybe Nikolaus Voss will deal with this case. > > regards > Joachim Eastwood > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c >> index 0f24cfb..805ef95 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c >> @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static struct i2c_gpio_platform_data pdata = { >> >> static struct platform_device at91sam9260_twi_device = { >> .name = "i2c-gpio", >> - .id = -1, >> + .id = 0, >> .dev.platform_data = &pdata, >> }; >> >> -- >> 1.7.9.5 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Le 10/15/2012 04:09 AM, Bo Shen a écrit : > Hi Joachim Eastwood, > > On 10/13/2012 1:42, Joachim Eastwood wrote: >> Hi Bo Shen, >> >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> wrote: >>> The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. >>> When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned >>> the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, >>> and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device >>> if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. >>> >>> In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number >>> Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). >> >> I have been bitten by this myself on RM9200. >> >>> Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> >>> --- >>> Change since v1 >>> Make the commit message more clear >>> --- >>> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- >> >> This pattern exist in at91rm9200_devices.c, at91sam9261_devices.c, >> at91sam9263_devices.c and at91sam9rl_devices.c you might want to fix >> them as well. > > Thanks for your information. > After I test these boards, I will send patches to fix them, while not in > this patch. > >> >> I assume we have the same problem if CONFIG_I2C_AT91 is set? >> See further down in at91sam9260_devices.c we have another: ".id = -1," > > Maybe Nikolaus Voss will deal with this case. > Yes the problem is the same, I have encountered it and solved it in the same way but I was thinking there was a better way to correct it than removing dynamic id assignment. Since setting the id to a fix value is acceptable this change can be done also when using i2c-at91. >> >> regards >> Joachim Eastwood >> >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c >>> b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c >>> index 0f24cfb..805ef95 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c >>> @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static struct i2c_gpio_platform_data pdata = { >>> >>> static struct platform_device at91sam9260_twi_device = { >>> .name = "i2c-gpio", >>> - .id = -1, >>> + .id = 0, >>> .dev.platform_data = &pdata, >>> }; >>> >>> -- >>> 1.7.9.5 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list >>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >
On 10/15/2012 04:09 AM, Bo Shen : > Hi Joachim Eastwood, > > On 10/13/2012 1:42, Joachim Eastwood wrote: >> Hi Bo Shen, >> >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> wrote: >>> The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. >>> When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned >>> the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, >>> and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device >>> if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. >>> >>> In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number >>> Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). >> >> I have been bitten by this myself on RM9200. >> >>> Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> >>> --- >>> Change since v1 >>> Make the commit message more clear >>> --- >>> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- >> >> This pattern exist in at91rm9200_devices.c, at91sam9261_devices.c, >> at91sam9263_devices.c and at91sam9rl_devices.c you might want to fix >> them as well. > > Thanks for your information. > After I test these boards, I will send patches to fix them, while not in > this patch. I am in favor of doing a comprehensive patch series that covers all aspects of this issue: - each boards - both i2c-gpio and i2c-at91 cases Bye,
Hi Nicolas, On 10/15/2012 16:12, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > On 10/15/2012 04:09 AM, Bo Shen : >> Hi Joachim Eastwood, >> >> On 10/13/2012 1:42, Joachim Eastwood wrote: >>> Hi Bo Shen, >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> wrote: >>>> The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. >>>> When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned >>>> the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, >>>> and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device >>>> if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. >>>> >>>> In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number >>>> Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). >>> >>> I have been bitten by this myself on RM9200. >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> >>>> --- >>>> Change since v1 >>>> Make the commit message more clear >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- >>> >>> This pattern exist in at91rm9200_devices.c, at91sam9261_devices.c, >>> at91sam9263_devices.c and at91sam9rl_devices.c you might want to fix >>> them as well. >> >> Thanks for your information. >> After I test these boards, I will send patches to fix them, while not in >> this patch. > > I am in favor of doing a comprehensive patch series that covers all > aspects of this issue: > - each boards > - both i2c-gpio and i2c-at91 cases May I need to submit this patch as a series? One patch for one board, and cover i2c-gpio and i2c-at91 cases. e.g: [patch 1/x] i2c: change id to let i2c-gpio work on at91rm200ek [patch 2/x] i2c: change id to let i2c-gpio work on at91sam9261ek ... or Just one patch, cover all these boards and i2c-gpio and i2c-at91? > Bye, >
On 10/15/2012 10:26 AM, Bo Shen : > Hi Nicolas, > > On 10/15/2012 16:12, Nicolas Ferre wrote: >> On 10/15/2012 04:09 AM, Bo Shen : >>> Hi Joachim Eastwood, >>> >>> On 10/13/2012 1:42, Joachim Eastwood wrote: >>>> Hi Bo Shen, >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> wrote: >>>>> The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. >>>>> When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned >>>>> the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, >>>>> and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device >>>>> if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. >>>>> >>>>> In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix >>>>> number >>>>> Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). >>>> >>>> I have been bitten by this myself on RM9200. >>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> Change since v1 >>>>> Make the commit message more clear >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- >>>> >>>> This pattern exist in at91rm9200_devices.c, at91sam9261_devices.c, >>>> at91sam9263_devices.c and at91sam9rl_devices.c you might want to fix >>>> them as well. >>> >>> Thanks for your information. >>> After I test these boards, I will send patches to fix them, while not in >>> this patch. >> >> I am in favor of doing a comprehensive patch series that covers all >> aspects of this issue: >> - each boards >> - both i2c-gpio and i2c-at91 cases > > May I need to submit this patch as a series? One patch for one board, > and cover i2c-gpio and i2c-at91 cases. > e.g: > [patch 1/x] i2c: change id to let i2c-gpio work on at91rm200ek > [patch 2/x] i2c: change id to let i2c-gpio work on at91sam9261ek > ... > > or > > Just one patch, cover all these boards and i2c-gpio and i2c-at91? Neither of the altenatives ;-) I would have done: 1 for i2c-gpio covering all boards impacted 1 for i2c-at91 covering all boards impacted... Bye,
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c index 0f24cfb..805ef95 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c @@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ static struct i2c_gpio_platform_data pdata = { static struct platform_device at91sam9260_twi_device = { .name = "i2c-gpio", - .id = -1, + .id = 0, .dev.platform_data = &pdata, };
The i2c-gpio driver will turn the platform device ID to busnum. When using platfrom device ID as -1, it means dynamically assigned the busnum. When writing code, we need to make sure the busnum, and call i2c_register_board_info(int busnum, ...) to register device if using -1, we do not know the value of busnum. In order to solve this issue, set the platform device ID as a fix number Here using 0 to match the busnum used in i2c_regsiter_board_info(). Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com> --- Change since v1 Make the commit message more clear --- arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)