Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751964AbdHAOW0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2017 10:22:26 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f66.google.com ([209.85.218.66]:34275 "EHLO mail-oi0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751805AbdHAOWX (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2017 10:22:23 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170801155813.4b811a4d@bbrezillon> References: <1501518290-5723-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <1501518290-5723-3-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20170731231509.77d1fba4@bbrezillon> <20170801142936.5df48702@bbrezillon> <20170801153414.6ce34ee8@bbrezillon> <20170801155813.4b811a4d@bbrezillon> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 16:22:21 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: q5n4Eo2jJUs0zvKY8FC4xod5vis Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure To: Boris Brezillon Cc: Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Przemyslaw Sroka , Arkadiusz Golec , Alan Douglas , Bartosz Folta , Damian Kos , Alicja Jurasik-Urbaniak , Jan Kotas , Cyprian Wronka , Alexandre Belloni , Thomas Petazzoni , Nishanth Menon , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1385 Lines: 31 On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 15:34:14 +0200 > Boris Brezillon wrote: >> On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 15:11:44 +0200 >> Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> > On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Boris Brezillon >> > wrote: > I just realized I forgot to add a "depends on I2C" in the I3C Kconfig > entry. Indeed, I'm unconditionally calling functions provided by the > I2C framework which have no dummy wrapper when I2C support is disabled. > I could of course conditionally compile some portion of the I3C > framework so that it still builds when I2C is disabled but I'm not sure > it's worth the trouble. > > This "depends on I2C" should also solve the I2C+I3C driver issue, since > I2C is necessarily enabled when I3C is. > > Am I missing something? That should solve another part of the problem, as a combined driver then just needs 'depends on I3C'. On top of that, the i3c_driver structure could also contain callback pointers for the i2c subsystem, e.g. i2c_probe(), i2c_remove() etc. When the i2c_probe() callback exists, the i3c layer could construct a 'struct i2c_driver' with those callbacks and register that under the cover. This would mean that combined drivers no longer need to register two driver objects. Arnd