Hi Mauro, On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:32:04 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Hi Jean, > > On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:15:51 +0100 > Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > As suggested by Mauro Carvalho Chehab. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > --- linux-2.6.29-rc7.orig/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2009-03-12 08:48:06.000000000 +0100 > > +++ linux-2.6.29-rc7/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt 2009-03-12 16:07:35.000000000 +0100 > > @@ -311,7 +311,8 @@ Who: Krzysztof Piotr Oledzki <ole@xxxxx > > --------------------------- > > > > What: i2c_attach_client(), i2c_detach_client(), i2c_driver->detach_client() > > -When: 2.6.29 (ideally) or 2.6.30 (more likely) > > +When: 2.6.30 > > There are still some legacy v4l drivers that uses those functions. I'm not sure > if there are enough time to convert all of them in time for 2.6.30 merge > window. Well, the legacy API will go away in 2.6.30. Drivers using it will break, I'm sure this will motivate users to complain, and in turn developers to fix their drivers ;) (I'm only half-kidding.) > Those directly references i2c_attach_client: > ir-kbd-i2c.c, ov7670.c, v4l2-common.c > > And those are using the legacy I2C header, created by Hans: > cs53l32a.c, cx25840-core.c, msp3400-driver.c, saa6588.c, saa7115.c, tda7432.c > tda9875.c, tuner-core.c, tvaudio.c, tvp5150.c, wm8775.c As I understand it, Hans is already working on converting these drivers to no longer use the legacy model. So there really only are 3 drivers which need more work. I am working on ir-kbd-i2c myself (well, I am supposed to... didn't progress too much lately). > This plus the I2C buses that requires those drivers. > > Depending on the time Linus releases 2.6.29, it would probably be more > realistic to schedule it to 2.6.31. There's no point in rescheduling. If we patiently wait for an API to become unused before we remove it, there's no point to announce a version when the API will be removed in the first palce, and there's a risk that the removal will never happen. The whole point of announcing a version is that developers can prepare for it and we stick to what we announced (as much as possible). Really, I don't think 2.6.30 is unrealistic. Hans has done a huge work already for the v4l side. I have done my part on hwmon, and Alessandro Zummo on rtc. Getting the remainder done within a few weeks sounds totally possible _if_ we can drop support kernels < 2.6.22 from the v4l-dvb repository. This has already been discussed... There are i2c subsystem fixes and improvements which many people have asked for which depend on this. -- Jean Delvare -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
