There is an automatic binding done for I2C devices in the of_i2c core
code. So, DT will be able to bind to any I2C device using the
already existing table: MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, bmp085_id).
Tested on omap5430 evm.
Cc: Benoit Cousson <[email protected]>
Cc: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sourav Poddar <[email protected]>
---
drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c | 7 -------
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c b/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c
index 9943971..a4f33c9 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c
@@ -57,12 +57,6 @@ static int bmp085_i2c_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
return bmp085_remove(&client->dev);
}
-static const struct of_device_id bmp085_of_match[] = {
- { .compatible = "bosch,bmp085", },
- { },
-};
-MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, bmp085_of_match);
-
static const struct i2c_device_id bmp085_id[] = {
{ BMP085_NAME, 0 },
{ "bmp180", 0 },
@@ -74,7 +68,6 @@ static struct i2c_driver bmp085_i2c_driver = {
.driver = {
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
.name = BMP085_NAME,
- .of_match_table = bmp085_of_match
},
.id_table = bmp085_id,
.probe = bmp085_i2c_probe,
--
1.7.1
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 02:58:44PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote:
> There is an automatic binding done for I2C devices in the of_i2c core
> code. So, DT will be able to bind to any I2C device using the
> already existing table: MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, bmp085_id).
>
> Tested on omap5430 evm.
>
> Cc: Benoit Cousson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Sourav Poddar <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c | 7 -------
> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c b/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c
> index 9943971..a4f33c9 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/bmp085-i2c.c
> @@ -57,12 +57,6 @@ static int bmp085_i2c_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> return bmp085_remove(&client->dev);
> }
>
> -static const struct of_device_id bmp085_of_match[] = {
> - { .compatible = "bosch,bmp085", },
> - { },
> -};
> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, bmp085_of_match);
> -
> static const struct i2c_device_id bmp085_id[] = {
> { BMP085_NAME, 0 },
> { "bmp180", 0 },
> @@ -74,7 +68,6 @@ static struct i2c_driver bmp085_i2c_driver = {
> .driver = {
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> .name = BMP085_NAME,
> - .of_match_table = bmp085_of_match
> },
> .id_table = bmp085_id,
> .probe = bmp085_i2c_probe,
> --
> 1.7.1
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
balbi
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:30:34PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 02:58:44PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote:
> > There is an automatic binding done for I2C devices in the of_i2c core
> > code. So, DT will be able to bind to any I2C device using the
> > already existing table: MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, bmp085_id).
> Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
It's good practice to have an explict compatible string even if the
default happens to work in order to avoid any name clashes.
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 04:42:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:30:34PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 02:58:44PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote:
> > > There is an automatic binding done for I2C devices in the of_i2c core
> > > code. So, DT will be able to bind to any I2C device using the
> > > already existing table: MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, bmp085_id).
>
> > Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
>
> It's good practice to have an explict compatible string even if the
> default happens to work in order to avoid any name clashes.
of_i2c.c makes no use whatsoever of the compatible string. See that it
will build an i2c_boardinfo and register a new device. That compatible
string is just churn and has no use at all.
--
balbi
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 08:43:44AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 04:42:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > It's good practice to have an explict compatible string even if the
> > default happens to work in order to avoid any name clashes.
> of_i2c.c makes no use whatsoever of the compatible string. See that it
> will build an i2c_boardinfo and register a new device. That compatible
If that's all that's done it seems like a bug frankly, certainly based
on previous discussions it ought to be. There are collisions out there,
they've just happened to not bite us yet
> string is just churn and has no use at all.
This is device tree we're talking about, there's a lot churn anyway.
On Aug 7, 2012, at 4:52 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 08:43:44AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 04:42:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>>> It's good practice to have an explict compatible string even if the
>>> default happens to work in order to avoid any name clashes.
>
>> of_i2c.c makes no use whatsoever of the compatible string. See that it
>> will build an i2c_boardinfo and register a new device. That compatible
>
> If that's all that's done it seems like a bug frankly, certainly based
> on previous discussions it ought to be. There are collisions out there,
> they've just happened to not bite us yet
Also keep in mind that the device tree is supposed to be a description of the hardware, and different implementations of the device tree may use the compatible string.
Warner