From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966515AbcKOJsv (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2016 04:48:51 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:34409 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965962AbcKOJss (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Nov 2016 04:48:48 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 07/11] i2c: match dt-style device names from sysfs interface To: Wolfram Sang References: <1478522866-29620-1-git-send-email-kieran@bingham.xyz> <1478522866-29620-8-git-send-email-kieran@bingham.xyz> <20161114194953.GB3603@katana> Cc: Lee Jones , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Javier Martinez Canillas , sameo@linux.intel.com From: Kieran Bingham Message-ID: <539439ac-af8c-745d-a028-1282eb9155da@bingham.xyz> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 09:48:45 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161114194953.GB3603@katana> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 14/11/16 22:27, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 12:47:42PM +0000, Kieran Bingham wrote: >> A user can choose to instantiate a device on an i2c bus using the sysfs >> interface by providing a string and address to match and communicate >> with the device on the bus. Presently this string is only matched >> against the old i2c device id style strings, even in the presence of >> full device tree compatible strings with vendor prefixes. >> >> Providing a vendor-prefixed string to the sysfs interface will not match >> against the device tree of_match_device() calls as there is no device >> tree node to parse from the sysfs interface. >> >> Convert i2c_of_match_device_strip_vendor() such that it can match both > > The function name here is the old one... > >> vendor prefixed and stripped compatible strings on the sysfs interface. >> >> Signed-off-by: Kieran Bingham > > ... and in patch 2, the sentence "remove this function if all drivers > are converted" is obsolete, too, since we need this function always for > sysfs. > > This make me wonder if we shouldn't squash this patch also in into patch > 2 (like I suggested for the next one), and create a best-of-all-worlds > commit message from these three patches? > > Opinions? That's fine with me - My main reason for keeping them separate during posting was so that the changes I had made could be seen - but yes - I think they probably are eligible for squashing. -- Regards Kieran Bingham