Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 06 May 2004 10:17:19 +0200 | From | Michael Hunold <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][2.6] |
| |
Hello Greg,
On 05/05/04 19:53, Greg KH wrote: >>I think these things are unquestionable and don't make any functional >>changes to the code, so this should be applied to 2.6 now.
> Now as in I'll add it to my i2c tree, which will get picked up by -mm > and let it bake a bit and then pushed to Linus, yes.
This is how I meant it.
Quoting your other mail:
> Looks good, I've applied this to my trees, and it will show up in the > next -mm release.
Ok, thanks. As my time permits it, I'll prepare patches to add class entries to the i2c adapters and i2c clients.
But I won't be sad if the sensors people make the changes to their drivers themselves. ;-)
(ie. mostly remove > if (!(adapter->class & I2C_CLASS_SMBUS)) > return 0; from the xxx_attach_adapter() funtion (the check will be done in the i2c-core and add a .class = I2C_CLASS_SMBUS to the xxx_driver static variable)
> greg k-h
CU Michael. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |