[PATCH RFC v3] media: i2c: mt9p031: add OF support

[Prabhakar Lad]

Hi Arnd,

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Prabhakar Lad
<prabhakar.csengg at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>> On Friday 03 May 2013, Prabhakar Lad wrote:
>>>
> [snip]
>>> +}
>>
>> Ok, good.
>>
>>> @@ -955,7 +998,17 @@ static int mt9p031_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>>         mt9p031->pdata = pdata;
>>>         mt9p031->output_control = MT9P031_OUTPUT_CONTROL_DEF;
>>>         mt9p031->mode2 = MT9P031_READ_MODE_2_ROW_BLC;
>>> -       mt9p031->model = did->driver_data;
>>> +
>>> +       if (!client->dev.of_node) {
>>> +               mt9p031->model = (enum mt9p031_model)did->driver_data;
>>> +       } else {
>>> +               const struct of_device_id *of_id;
>>> +
>>> +               of_id = of_match_device(of_match_ptr(mt9p031_of_match),
>>> +                                       &client->dev);
>>> +               if (of_id)
>>> +                       mt9p031->model = (enum mt9p031_model)of_id->data;
>>> +       }
>>>         mt9p031->reset = -1;
>>
>> Is this actually required? I thought the i2c core just compared the
>> part of the "compatible" value after the first comma to the string, so
>> "mt9p031->model = (enum mt9p031_model)did->driver_data" should work
>> in both cases.
>>
> I am OK with "mt9p031->model = (enum mt9p031_model)did->driver_data"
> but I see still few drivers doing this, I am not sure for what reason.
> If everyone is
> OK with it I can drop the above change.
>
My bad, while booting with DT the i2c_device_id ie did in this case
will be NULL,
so the above changes are required :-)

Regards,
--Prabhakar Lad