Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v3 1/7] arm: Uniquely name imx25 I2C buses.

[Cédric Le Goater]

On 12/14/2016 06:41 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 2 December 2016 at 05:46, Alastair D'Silva <address@hidden> wrote:
>> From: Alastair D'Silva <address@hidden>
>>
>> The imx25 chip provides 3 i2c buses, but they have all been named
>> "i2c", which makes it difficult to predict which bus a device will
>> be connected to when specified on the command line.
>>
>> This patch addresses the issue by naming the buses uniquely:
>>   i2c-bus.0 i2c-bus.1 i2c-bus.2
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alastair D'Silva <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>  hw/arm/imx25_pdk.c | 4 +---
>>  hw/i2c/imx_i2c.c   | 2 +-
>>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/arm/imx25_pdk.c b/hw/arm/imx25_pdk.c
>> index 025b608..c6f04d3 100644
>> --- a/hw/arm/imx25_pdk.c
>> +++ b/hw/arm/imx25_pdk.c
>> @@ -138,9 +138,7 @@ static void imx25_pdk_init(MachineState *machine)
>>           * We add it here (only on qtest usage) to be able to do a bit
>>           * of simple qtest. See "make check" for details.
>>           */
>> -        i2c_create_slave((I2CBus 
>> *)qdev_get_child_bus(DEVICE(&s->soc.i2c[0]),
>> -                                                      "i2c"),
>> -                         "ds1338", 0x68);
>> +        i2c_create_slave(s->soc.i2c[0].bus, "ds1338", 0x68);
> 
> This bit doesn't look right. The board level code shouldn't be
> poking around inside the IMXI2CState struct, as that is private
> to the device implementation. That's why we're calling
> qdev_get_child_bus().

That was my suggestion. Sorry about that. 

May be, we could use "i2c.0", now that we have numbered the I2C bus 
names ? 

Thanks,

C.