[PATCH 1/3] i2c-mv64xxx: Add I2C Transaction Generator support

[Maxime Ripard]

On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 02:05:24PM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> On 16/07/2013 10:05, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > Hi Gregory,
> > 
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 04:24:36PM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> >> The I2C Transaction Generator offloads CPU from managing I2C transfer step by step.
> >> 
> >> This feature is currently only available on Armada XP, so usage of this mechanism is activated through device tree.
> >> 
> >> Based on the work of Piotr Ziecik and rewrote to use the new way of handling multiples i2c messages.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Piotr Ziecik <kosmo at semihalf.com> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement at free-electrons.com> --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c | 207
> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 196 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> >> +	/* +	 * For controllers embedded in new SoCs activate the +	 * Transaction Generator support. +	 */ +	if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "marvell,mv78230-i2c")) +
> >> drv_data->offload_enabled = true; +
> > 
> > Do you have a reason for not adding it to the match table? I mean, you will introduce a new compatible here, but if that compatible is used alone, won't probe the driver? That doesn't
> > seem very right to me.
> 
> But we shouldn't use it alone: we should always use:
> compatible = "marvell,mv78230-i2c", "marvell,mv64xxx-i2c";
> 
> From my point of view using  "marvell,mv78230-i2c" alone is an error.

Why is that? If the I2C controller is a new IP with additional features,
it should have a full compatible of its own, doesn't it?

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20130806/58933445/attachment-0001.sig>