> > -int of_i2c_get_board_info(struct device_node *node, struct i2c_board_info *info)
> > +static void of_i2c_decode_board_info(struct device_node *node, u32 addr,
> > +				     bool first_addr, struct i2c_board_info *info)
> 
> While I confirm the patch looks generally OK, let me add the name of
> this function is not quite self-explaining. The difference between "get"
> and "decode" has nothing to do with the different actions these
> functions do, i.e. the new function gets (or: decodes) info about  a
> single address that is passed, the old "get" function gets the info for
> the first address.
>
> I'd suggest the new function be named of_i2c_get_board_info_one_addr or
> similar. Not super nice, a bit long, but self-explanatory.

I view them a bit differently, I think. of_i2c_decode_board_info() is a
helper function to retrieve "some" addr. It is used by
of_i2c_get_board_info() which has the special case of getting the first
address. of_i2c_register_device() is the other user with the case of
getting each address specified. So, I wouldn't put this helper function
on the same level as the users of this helper.

Yet, no strong opinion here, I will think about it...