Re: [PATCH v2] i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-ltc4306: LTC4306 and LTC4305 I2C multiplexer/switch

From: Michael Hennerich
Date: Tue Apr 04 2017 - 02:31:15 EST


On 03.04.2017 16:20, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2017-04-03 15:36, Michael Hennerich wrote:
On 03.04.2017 14:03, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2017-03-31 17:29, Peter Rosin wrote:
Hi!

Sorry for my incremental reviewing...


Another incremental...

On 2017-03-29 12:15, michael.hennerich@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
+
+ /* Now create an adapter for each channel */
+ for (num = 0; num < data->chip->nchans; num++) {
+ ret = i2c_mux_add_adapter(muxc, 0, num, 0);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(&client->dev,
+ "failed to register multiplexed adapter %d\n",
+ num);

Just a heads up, I submitted a series to remove a bunch of dev_err calls
when i2c_mux_add_adapter fails. See https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/3/115

You can remove this one as well.

And please use a subject of the form:
i2c: mux: ltc4306: <message>
ok - no problem.

You managed to drop the spaces after the new colons in the subject.

And maybe there is a problem, because I don't see any reaction to any of
the review comments I made in https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/31/525

Was that on purpose? Sure, the gpio "jury" is still out on the bigger
question so maybe you're waiting for that, but there were a few nitpicks
as well. Anyway, sorry again for failing to compile all comments up front.

Hi Peter,

sorry - this was not on purpose. I simply missed your second to last incremental review. I fix the subject now finally.

Thanks for your patience.


I sent out a new patch. Per Rob's request, I split out the dt-bindings
into a separate patch.

Thanks. I think(?) it is customary to have the bindings first, and then
implement that "specification" in followup patches. No big deal though...

Cheers,
peda




--
Greetings,
Michael

--
Analog Devices GmbH Otl-Aicher Strasse 60-64 80807 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft München, Registergericht München HRB 40368,
Geschäftsführer: Peter Kolberg, Ali Raza Husain, Eileen Wynne