So the IGNORE_LIST is intended for devices that may or may not be present, and neither state is considered an error?
Correct. And also for devices that may or may not be present, but are impossible to determine if they should/shouldn't be present, so its impossible to determine what an error case is (if that makes sense...).
I gave a few examples in the original patch of when this might be useful. Most of the examples could be better solved by a more complicated, dynamically generated I2C_ADDR_LIST (eg detect if an XMC card is present, and if so, add device 0x50 to the list of expected devices), but it seems like overkill for a simple POST.
I2C_POST_ADDR_IGNORE_LIST
I was following the lead of the existing I2C_ADDR_LIST define. Agreed it should be named differently. I'll go with CONFIG_SYS_POST_I2C_ADDRS and CONFIG_SYS_POST_I2C_IGNORES unless someone else chimes in.
Argh... I don't like identifiers that need half a line or more...
Agreed, but its hard when over half the name is the mandatory CONFIG_SYS_POST_ prefix. Any suggestions?
Omit that ?
<me hides />
:)
Best, Peter