lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] eeprom: at24: extend driver to plug into the NVMEM framework


    On 17/08/15 14:09, Andrew Lunn wrote:
    > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 02:01:24PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
    >>
    >> +Adding Maxime in the loop
    >>
    >> On 16/08/15 16:37, Stefan Wahren wrote:
    >>>>> Another question which spring to mind is, do we want the eeprom to be
    >>>>> in /sys twice, the old and the new way? Backwards compatibility says
    >>>>> the old must stay. Do we want a way to suppress the new? Or should we
    >>>>> be going as far as refractoring the code into a core library, and two
    >>>>> wrapper drivers, old and new?
    >>> I think these are questions for the framework maintainers.
    >>>
    >> One of the reasons for the NVMEM framework is to remove that
    >> duplicate code in the every driver. There was no framework/ABI
    >> which was guiding such old eeprom sysfs entry in first place, so I
    >> dont see an issue in removing it for good. Correct me if am wrong.
    >
    > The reason for keeping it is backwards compatibility. Having the
    > contents of the EEPROM as a file in /sys via this driver is now a part
    > of the Linux ABI. You cannot argue it is not an ABI, just because
    > there is no framework. Userspace will be assuming it exists at the
    > specified location. So we cannot remove it, for existing uses of the
    > driver.
    Am Ok as long as someone is happy to maintain it.

    --srini
    >
    > However, for new uses of this driver, it is O.K. to only have the
    > NVMEM file.
    >
    > Andrew
    >


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2015-08-17 17:41    [W:3.317 / U:0.000 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site