On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 06:33:44PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
> OK - talked with Ville a bit on this and did some of my own research, I
> actually think that moving i2c to drm_dp_aux_init() is the right decision for
> the time being. The reasoning behind this being that as shown by my previous
> work of fixing drivers that call drm_dp_aux_register() too early - it seems
> like there's already been drivers that have been working just fine with
> setting up the i2c device before DRM registration. 
> 
> In the future, it'd probably be better if we can split up i2c_add_adapter()
> into an init and register function - but we'll have to talk with the i2c
> maintainers to see if this is acceptable w/ them

Yeah, that sounds like a better long-term solution. We could leave
i2c_add_adapter() in place, since it's already half-way split up into
some initialization code and i2c_register_adapter(), so it shouldn't be
all that difficult to split out an i2c_init_adapter() so that outside
users can do the split setup.

Thierry